Of the 235,000 Idahoans on food stamps, 40 percent of them, or about 93,000, are non-disabled adults without children. A portion of them, about 22,000, are not required to do any work searches or job applications to take part in the program.

These 22,000 are without jobs and don’t qualify for unemployment benefits, which require recipients to be actively seeking work in order to receive money.

It hasn’t always been this way, though. Tom Shanahan, spokesman for DHW, said that before budget holdbacks occurred in late 2009, the state required this select group of people to be seeking work in order to receive food stamps. Budget cuts forced the department to cut administrative costs and the oversight requirements were effectively ended.

There is another segment of food stamp recipients that neither earns a paycheck nor qualifies for unemployment benefits, but is required to seek work in order to qualify for aid. As part of a block grant from the Temporary Assistance for Needy Family program administered by the state, about 31,000 adults with children fall into this classification and are required to look for work to receive food stamps.

Another 40,000 adults are either working or qualify for unemployment payments. About 48 percent of food stamp recipients are children.

Rep. Marv Hagedorn, R-Meridian, told IdahoReporter.com Wednesday he doesn’t favor restoring funds to ensure the single, able-bodied adults have to look for work to get food stamps, but instead suggests DHW and the Department of Labor could collaborate to find ways to get recipients earning paychecks.

Hagedorn also suggests that food stamp recipients not working should be required to do some form of community service, including working in schools, food pantries or other charitable organizations. “If a community is supporting you, then it’s only right that the support be returned to the community,” Hagedorn said.

McGeachin had copies of the 2010 federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act printed at a local business and paid for it out of her own campaign funds. She wants legislators to read and review the legislation and be very familiar with it as the Legislature moves forward with discussion of the health insurance exchange and Medicaid changes.

“This is a gift to you from me,” McGeachin said. “It’s not paid for with taxpayer expense. This is going to be our Bible this year.”

Each lawmaker on the panel received 906 pieces of paper.  It took six House pages – legislative assistants – to bring the stacks of paper into the panel. It is, however, smaller than the original legislation, which reached more than 2,200 pages.  The legislation did not become less wordy with the reduction to 906 pages from 2,200 – the committee chair reduced the print size to fit the law onto 906 pages.

McGeachin is planning weekly learning sessions for lawmakers to review federal health reforms. The meetings aren’t official in nature, and are open to the public.

Here’s a picture of the stack:

House Bill 699a, sponsored by Rep. Phil Hart, R-Athol, and the Idaho Freedom Foundation, a Boise-based free market think tank, mandates that school districts serving more than 300 students post vendor contracts, collective bargaining agreements and monthly expenditures on their websites. The information must be easily-accessible from a district web page.

Officials had until Thursday to meet the guidelines, though Melissa McGrath, spokeswoman for the Idaho Department of Education, said the legislation doesn’t address enforcement of the law.

Laura Rumpler, communication director for the Coeur d’Alene School District, says the law has added a burden to school officials, noting that adding the data to the website took about 20 hours in the last few weeks. Going forward, Rumpler expects school workers to spend on average five hours each month keeping the data and information current.

Still, she says, officials are happy to follow the rules. “We are a district that follows the law,” she explained.

Coeur d’Alene completed the task in the last few days. “We made sure everything is public and easy to access,” Rumpler concluded. (See Coeur d’Alene’s expenditure disclosure site here.)

But Wayne Hoffman, IFF’s head man, disputes that the mandates mean extra tasks for schools. “It doesn’t add a bunch of extra work,” Hoffman said. “It’s just a matter of making information that is already there accessible to the public.”

Hoffman said government entities have the duty to disclose the data. “One of the basic roles of government is being transparent to taxpayers,” Hoffman explained. “It they are unable to do that, they need to ask themselves why they cannot fulfill one of the most basic missions of government.”

Beth Pendergrass, community relations manager for the Twin Falls School District, told IdahoReporter.com Thursday that she too is happy to provide the information for transparency’s sake, but also believes the requirements of the law mean much extra work.

“It does put kind of a burden on the schools because of the time needed,” Pendergrass explained. “But obviously, the public has the right to know.”

Pendergrass said that open records laws may have been enough to create an environment of transparency, but says, like Rumpler, her district will follow the law. “I think it’s appropriate to have transparency in government agencies,” she explained.

The problem with the measure, she added, is the mandates on how fiscal reports are generated. The specifics in the law, Rumpler said, mean extra work for employees in all 13 schools in the Twin Falls School District. (See Twin Falls’ expenditure site here.)

The Pocatello School District finished posting its financial data this week, though finance director Carl Smart notes he has been placing most of the data on the website for years. To come into compliance, Smart only had to create monthly expenditure reports, a task that took at least a week.  Smart said ensuring that no protected employee or student data was put into the public domain took most of the time.

“We have to be careful in the way we disclose things,” Smart said.

Disclosure notice: The Idaho Freedom Foundation publishes IdahoReporter.com. 

The project would install a cement  or asphalt path between Seltice Way and Mullan Avenue in Post Falls, a route which would help pedestrians and bikes safely pass underneath Interstate 90 and alongside of Highway 41. The proposed trail is four-tenths of a mile long.

Thursday’s vote authorizes JUB Engineers, an architectural firm in north Idaho, to proceed with design work only.

PFURA set aside $725,000 for the project. However, estimates show that number could jump to at least $748,900, but could top $1 million if a water line buried below the proposed trail route needs to be moved.

Commissioners, including panel chair Bobbi Rollins, began discussion intending to cancel the project. “The cost of it is one of the reasons we’re terminating,” Rollins explained. “The price is too high in this economy.”

But two board members, vice chair Peter Smith and Tim Short, pushed the board into moving forward because they didn’t want the money already invested in engineering costs to go to waste.

PFURA has already paid JUB Engineers about $55,000 in engineering fees, with $20,000 more in the budget. The engineering fees are not included in the overall cost projection of the trail.

Smith said that $20,000 is a small cost to pay to see if the project can go forward. “I think we’ve taken $55,000 and lit it on fire,” he said. “I would like to get something out of the investment we’ve made, but we have absolutely nothing.”

Short warned once JUB finishes engineering and design work for the project, commissioners can then work with the firm to find ways to bring the project under budget. “I think there’s more exploration to be done,” Short said. “I would be in favor of allowing them to go further.”

Commissioner Jerry Baltzfell, the leading voice in favor of axing the project, believes the project will end up over budget and that moving forward would be wasteful.  “In my mind, we need to stop spending money on this project until it makes sense to do it,” Baltzfell pleaded. “It just costs too much money.”

Baltzfell warned that the public likely wouldn’t see the value of building a bike path during a down economy.

Commissioners now wait for the final design from JUB and there is no timeline on when it may be completed. The board will receive an update on project progress at its monthly meeting.

During the last legislative session House Bill 222 was introduced by Rep. Erik Simpson, R-Idaho Falls. The bill was a lightning rod for advocates and opponents alike. The measure would have restricted colleges and universities from prohibiting firearms on campus. It passed the House, but failed in the Senate.

Simpson has not decided whether he will bring the bill back this coming legislative session, but believes the ruling in Oregon supports his position. “To me the Oregon Court of Appeals is a precursor to what’s going to happen in Idaho. It’ll be a lower circuit court, or ultimately it’ll be the Idaho Supreme Court that will issue a decision that is going to be entirely consistent with what the Oregon Court of Appeals issued last week. The reason I say that is because there is nothing in our state constitution, nor in Idaho Code, that allows publicly funded colleges and universities to ban firearms.”

Simpson believes “Oregon’s decision reaffirms what I’ve been saying about Idaho since I first brought the bill. And that is, it’s the Legislature’s responsibility to pass the laws as they relate to concealed weapons and where concealed weapons permit holders can carry. And in no way can university policy trump state law and our Idaho Constitution.”

Rep. Marv Hagedorn, R-Meridian, co-sponsored House Bill 222 and agrees with Simpson regarding the Idaho Constitution. In an email to IdahoReporter.com  Hagedorn said, “The Idaho Constitution clearly states that only the Legislature can manage concealed laws of our state and that everything else is ‘open carry’ and cannot be impinged in public areas, colleges and universities as well. There is currently a lawsuit between a law student and the U of I now where they did impinge on his rights while on campus and that is before the courts. I suspect that we will wait until that suit is completed. I predict the university will lose and we taxpayers will pay the young man for their unconstitutional regulations. I also suspect that we will have to see some changes in thought on the Senate side before we try it again … but it’s coming.”

Several public officials, including representatives from Boise State University, the University of Idaho, the College of Southern Idaho, and the Idaho State Board of Education testified against HB 222 when it was considered during the 2011 session. A representative from the Boise Police Department testified in opposition as well. Many argued that the bill would lead to unsafe conditions on campus as well as less local control.

One such opponent, Boise State executive director of campus security Jon Uda, a former FBI agent, voiced his concern about allowing guns on college campuses. “This bill is a solution to a non-existent problem with significant negative impacts. Boise State is committed to maintaining a safe and secure environment that is free of violence. This obligation includes eliminating recognized hazards from the campus community that contribute to violence and serious harm. Adding a weapon to a university environment will serve as an accelerant for conflict, not a deterrent.”

Whether or not the bill will be re-introduced, Rep. Simpson encourages Idahoans to read and research Article 1, Section 11 of the Idaho Constitution, which reads, “The people have the right to keep and bear arms, which right shall not be abridged; but this provision shall not prevent the passage of laws to govern the carrying of weapons concealed on the person nor prevent passage of legislation providing minimum sentences for crimes committed while in possession of a firearm, nor prevent the passage of legislation providing penalties for the possession of firearms by a convicted felon, nor prevent the passage of any legislation punishing the use of a firearm. No law shall impose licensure, registration or special taxation on the ownership or possession of firearms or ammunition. Nor shall any law permit the confiscation of firearms, except those actually used in the commission of a felony.”

Simpson points to a vote by Idahoans in 1978 as validating citizen opinion on firearm rights in the state. “That article and section was reaffirmed by the voters in 1978 through a citizen sponsored initiative and voters overwhelmingly approved the right to keep and bear arms in the state of Idaho. And, if you look at the history of citizen sponsored initiatives in the state of Idaho, those who voted in favor of Article 1, Section 11, it was the third highest percentage of support of any measure in state history. So, I don’t believe the universities should chip away at, to me, a key part of our state constitution and attempt to minimize people’s right to keep and bear arms and defend themselves by means of policy.”

That initiative passed with 82.5 percent in favor, 17.5 percent against.

Simpson, while not stating that he plans to introduce an HB 22-type bill in the 2012 session, nonetheless feels that the Oregon ruling and Idaho precedents are on his side. “I fully and wholeheartedly believe I have the state constitution on my side and I have Idaho Code on my side. And, I think the Oregon Court of Appeals ruling is a big shot in the arm for me and House Bill 222.”

Now, more than six years later, the center has yet to be built and planners are still figuring out where to put it, but officials say a final decision on placement is coming soon.

The project is expected to cost a little more than $11 million.  The federal dollars will cover the majority of the costs, but Capital City Development Corporation, Boise’s urban renewal agency, has also pledged more than $1.5 million to the center’s construction.

The center would provide a single transportation center for the region and busses, taxies, bikes, and vanpools would likely have space at the facility.  The new center would replace the current hub, which is spread along several blocks of Idaho Street in downtown Boise.

So what’s been delay? Those behind the center can’t decide on where the center should be built. In the past six years, several different sites have been considered for construction, but none have been the right fit.

The coordinating agency for the project, Valley Regional Transit (VRT), says there are two different locations under consideration, one known as “Site D” and the other called “Site H.”  The two prospective locales are located within about a block of one another near 12^th Street in downtown Boise.

Not everyone is happy with the two potential building spots for the transportation center.  Residents of a condo near Site H told the Idaho Statesman they are not thrilled at the prospect of having the extra noise, traffic, and pollution the center would inevitably bring.

VRT took public comment on the proposed location in May but has yet to release the results of that effort.

Mark Carnopis, VRT’s spokesman, says that a decision on the center’s location could come within 30 to 90 days.  That, he says, will enable construction to begin in the spring of 2013 if permitting and other pre-construction processes are not delayed.

Lindsay Nothern, Crapo’s spokesman, told IdahoReporter.com that his office is surprised at the length of the planning.  “We certainly didn’t envision that the process would take this long,” Nothern said.

Could the city lose the money? It’s possible, but highly unlikely, Nothern explained.  “We have not heard about any big changes from the city about plans for the project, nor have we heard from Boiseans or other Idahoans as of late who want the money redirected,” he said. “So, it will remain available unless we hear differently from the city.”

Rhonda Jalbert, a project manager with VRT, said that most of the federal money is still awaiting use, but not all of it.  Site H had an environmental assessment performed, which cost the agency $482,000 and was paid for with the federal money.  The rest of the work – primarily the site planning – was paid out of the agency’s operating budget.

Carnopis isn’t afraid to acknowledge the planning process for the center has been rather lengthy.  “We’ll be the first to admit it’s taken a while to get a site selected,” Carnopis said. “Without a doubt, it has taken us a long time to get to the point where we are now.”

The agency believes the center will be worth the wait when it is eventually open for business.  “This is so much better infrastructure to deal with,” he said.  “This is just one piece of the puzzle to one day have a regional transportation system.”

 Read VRT’s information and studies on the transit center here.

NIC’s decision to create a policy, called the “Time, Place and Manner Policy,” stemmed from a demonstration from the controversial Westboro Baptist Church last fall. The church came to campus to protest a performance of “The Laramie Project.” The play is about Matthew Shepard, who was murdered just outside of Laramie, Wyo., because of his sexual orientation.

The church, from Topeka, Kan., has gained notoriety for picketing military funerals claiming soldiers’ deaths are divine punishment on the nation for tolerating homosexuality.

John Martin, vice president for community relations and marketing at NIC, said the policy was created for safety reasons and to allow students to get to their classes. “The policy is to keep the campus safe and undisrupted when demonstrations are taking place. When Westboro Baptist Church visited us this last year we did not have a policy in place to say ‘OK, you’re welcome on our campus and we believe in the First Amendment right to free speech.’ However, we don’t believe groups that are demonstrating or exercising their right to free speech have the right to impede traffic or to disrupt classes or things of that nature.”

Martin also said having the policy in place allows the college to let demonstrations take place, and still allow students to get to their classes and get an education. The policy forbids demonstrations that impede driving or walking on campus; disrupt regular or authorized activities on NIC’s grounds of facilities including classrooms, offices and laboratories; are conducted within 20 feet of all exits, entrances, staircases, parking lots and roadways; and are conducted at a volume that disrupts the normal use of classrooms, offices and labs.

The policy gives administrators authority to restrict use of the zone to meet traffic or public transit needs. Demonstrators would have to give campus safety officials a 48-hour notice, and violators could be subject to campus disciplinary actions or criminal trespass charges.

NIC is not the only college to have a “free speech” policy. Martin said that several policies from other colleges and universities were looked at before creating the policy at NIC.

In fact, the biggest college in the state, Boise State University, has had a policy in place since 2001 that includes free speech activities. It calls the policy its Open Spaces Use policy. In the policy five areas are designated for such purposes. BSU allows picketing and carrying of placards in those five areas and any public areas on campus.

The new licenses have had some people worrying that Idaho has incorporated aspects of the federal REAL ID Act into them. According to Ed Pemble, ITD’s driver services manager, that is not the case. “Idaho is a not a REAL ID state and there are no plans to be one. REAL ID has a lot more to do with what is required to get a license than the card itself.” The Idaho Legislature three years ago passed legislation forbidding the state from complying with REAL ID.

Still, REAL ID was passed by Congress as a national security measure and there are some in Congress who are demanding that states comply with the law and that the federal government force its implementation. By contrast, the Cato Institute, a public policy think tank dedicated to limited government and individual liberty, is adamantly opposed to REAL ID.

Twenty-four states are refusing to comply with the REAL ID regulations, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. The law, passed by Congress in 2005 on the recommendation of the Sept. 11 commission that investigated the 2001 terror attacks, aims to prevent terrorists from obtaining valid driver’s licenses and ID cards. But the Bush administration delayed the program’s original May 2008 compliance deadline amid claims that it was an unfunded federal mandate that would cause major disruptions in air travel, limit access to federal facilities like courthouses and infringe on Americans’ privacy rights. Since then there have been two more delays, the latest from the Obama administration. It postponed enactment until January 2013. The program is estimated to cost $17 billion to implement.

Some confusion may have stemmed from the more uniform look of the new licenses. Idaho, along with other states, has taken the recommendations of the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators, which include having licenses from each state be as close as they can be as far as layout and where to look for certain information. The idea is that law enforcement officials don’t have to search for information about the motorist, they can know exactly where to look for the information.

Among the things required for REAL ID is proof of identity. If Idaho were to ever become a REAL ID state, every person who currently has a driver’s license would be required to go through the process of proving his identity. Pemble said for that to happen the current law rejecting REAL ID would have to be changed, and he does not believe that is going to occur.

Some REAL IDs also have a small computer chip in them to store information. Pemble said the new driver’s licenses are much more secure than Idaho’s previous ones, but it was done mostly to prevent counterfeiting. According to Pemble, “Bar-codes can be machine readable and our Idaho licenses do have bar codes. Enhanced driver’s licenses used for land border crossings require chips. Enhanced driver’s licenses are a form of REAL ID.”

However, while Idaho and 23 other states are on record opposing implementation of REAL ID, the fight is not over even with the delay by the Obama administration. The concern by some in Congress is that not having the REAL ID system could allow terrorists to move about the country undetected. “The timing for such a delay is worse than ever,” Texas Rep. Lamar Smith, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, said in a statement. “The administration should not prolong REAL ID implementation. By doing so, they disregard the law of the land. Delaying REAL ID unnecessarily places Americans’ lives at risk and threatens national security.”

But the National Governors Association welcomed the extension. “Protecting the security and integrity of drivers’ licenses and state identification cards is a top priority of the nation’s governors. However, REAL ID presents significant operational and fiscal challenges to states,” the group said in a statement. “Governors have long said that REAL ID, in its current form, is unworkable. That has not changed.” It added: “Extending the compliance deadline allows states and the federal government more time to find solutions that work,” adding, “Arbitrary deadlines that only keep people from boarding an airplane do not make the impossible possible.”

For the Washington, D.C.-based Cato Institute, the problem with REAL ID is its assault on what it calls “the rights of every American.” Says Cato policy analyst Jim Harper: “It (REAL ID) mandates that every state’s database – containing Social Security cards, copies of birth certificates, etc. – be linked and accessible to tens of thousands of DMV employees.

“By making our personal information accessible to countless individuals across the country, REAL ID exposes it to misuse and identity theft. In addition, the new driver’s licenses created by REAL ID will contain a machine-readable component, allowing the government to track and monitor law-abiding citizens like we are criminals on parole. Any way you look at it, the REAL ID national ID scheme is a bad law that needs to be scrapped. It is enormously expensive, offers little to no benefits, and places our personal information at risk for use in identify theft,” said Harper.

In a surprise move Thursday, as the Legislature finished its business for the year, Palmer was selected as chair of the committee.  House Speaker Lawewence Denney, R-Midvale, announced the change after lawmakers finished voting on bills for the year.  Palmer replaces Rep. Leon Smith, R-Twin Falls, in the job.

This is not the first leadership change for the panel this year. Rep. Phil Hart, R-Athol, originally held the vice  chairman post, but he resigned in a deal to end ethics investigations into his dealings with the Idaho State Tax Commission.  Palmer was tapped to fill that post. Rep. Julie Ellsworth, R-Boise, will serve as vice chairman.

Denney did not expound on why the change was made.  Smith was not on the House floor Thursday.  He was seen carrying moving boxes out of the Capitol Wednesday.

Rep. Tom Trail, R-Moscow, was replaced as chairman of the House Agricultural Committee.  He will be replaced by Rep. Ken Andrus, R-Soda Springs.

The measure, approved 49-20, now heads to the Idaho Senate for consideration.

The bill authorizes $1.8 billion in total state and federal spending for fiscal year 2012, which begins July 1.  The money represents an overall increase of 16 percent over last year.

State tax dollars headed toward the program are also hiked, increasing by $137 million.  The increased money brings the state share to $437 million, representing a 46 percent jump in the state allocation.  The spike in state funding comes from a reduction in the federal match rate for state funds.

The Medicaid budget would have been larger without targeted program reductions of $34.6 million provided for in House Bill 260, a measure that authorizes changes to health programs, including rate freezes and reduction of service levels.  Because of the federal match incentive for the program, the reduction will mean an overall loss of about $100 million in total funding.

Democrats in the House provided fierce debate against the budget, calling it inadequate and without proper care for the mentally disabled.

House Minority Leader John Rusche, D-Lewiston, said that the budget shows a lack of compassion for the most vulnerable citizens of the state.  “Budgets truly display the values we hold and I will be voting ‘no’ on this values statement,” said Rusche. “Are we really all in this together, or is it OK to throw some out of the life boat?”

But Rep. Steve Thayn, R-Emmett, defended the legislation, arguing that it promotes fiscal responsibility and puts no added burden upon Idaho taxpayers.  He said that the current Medicaid delivery system is “unsustainable,” and that House Bill 260 and the health and welfare budget put Idaho on the road to sound monetary policy in health costs.