Column: idaho legislature

Tempers Grow Short in Idaho Legislature

By Sharon Fisher, 3-02-10

	Rep. Bob Nonini, R-Coeur D'Alene

Just days after a spat in which the Idaho Senate refused to hear a bill to eliminate a House proposal for a 1 percent cost of living adjustment to state retirees, which Governor C.L. “Butch” Otter also weighed in on, another potential turf battle looms—one that could doom the carefully crafted education budget, scheduled to be voted on Wednesday morning by the Joint Finance-Appropriations Committee (JFAC).

In Tuesday’s meeting of the House Education committee, Chair Representative Bob Nonini, R-Coeur d’Alene, strongly criticized the process by which JFAC Chair Senator Dean Cameron, R-Rupert, had set up meetings with education stakeholders in order to determine the best way to make cuts to the education budget that would cause the least damage to schools and students. The meetings resulted in a proposed budget bill and an unprecedented dozen pages of intent language explaining it last week, which was supposed to culminate in a vote on Monday but which was postponed until Wednesday.

Nonini issued a number of strong statements during the committee hearing, such as referring to the “ugly process going on up there with JFAC,” that his committee was “chipping away at the armor they surround themselves with up there,” and, referring to the fact that the intent language had changed that day, complaining that JFAC had access to office staff with which to implement such changes. “I can see the advantage of having [budget and policy analysis division manager] Cathy Holland-Smith and [principal budget analyst] Paul Headlee at your beck and call making these changes,” he said. “JFAC rolls out a big ugly old sausage at the end of the day.”

The committee—which was hearing a presentation by Jason Hancock, deputy chief of staff for the department of education, who used to serve as a budget analyst—also discussed whether to send a letter to JFAC outlining its concerns, which Nonini called an “effort in futility” to “send a letter to Cameron and Bell’s round file.” “I’m not sure how much influence this committee has with JFAC,” he said. The budget analysts, as well as Cameron and co-chair Representative Maxine Bell, R-Rupert, “hook up early in the morning and get this stuff together.”

It’s not the first time that Nonini has spoken strongly. Last year, on the House floor, he attacked a number of Otter’s transportation proposals, to the extent that he was chided by Speaker of the House Lawerence Denney, R-Midvale.

Informed of Nonini’s remarks, Cameron said this was the most “open and transparent” the committee has ever been, noting that it was unprecedented to send out copies of the intent language ahead of time, and likening it to sending out copies of a legislator’s personal bill before it was heard by a committee.

Nonini had said in committee that JFAC only did that because of pressure from the House caucus. “This budget was going to be rolled over, I should say passed, on Monday,” and had not been “because our leadership stood up to the [JFAC] chairs.” However, Cameron denied this, saying that his committee had asked for the weekend to look the intent language over, and when that happened, they had released it to the other legislators as well, before any involvement from the caucus.

Nonini, as well as committee member Representative Branden Durst, D-Boise, also indicated that they believed the intent language impinged on the authority of the germane committee. Cameron agreed with this, noting that some of the proposed changes, such as reducing funding for field trips, would require legislation through the education committee. But he said that all such language had been approved by Nonini, who was part of the stakeholders’ meetings. “I don’t know how he can criticize,” he said. “He was part of the process.”

Cameron is concerned that Nonini might be looking for excuses to vote against the education budget bill when it reaches the House because he would prefer to have a lower budget figure. Nonini alluded to this in the committee hearing, saying he would have preferred an 8 percent cut in teacher pay rather than the propsoed 4 percent, and a 10 percent cut in administrative pay rather than the proposed 6 percent, but was overruled. However, Cameron said the budget situation simply didn’t require such deep cuts, though Nonini said in committee he had heard that February tax revenues, which have not yet been released, were $10 million below the projected figure—which could require further education cuts.

Last year, Nonini came under criticism for proposing bills outlining cuts to teacher salaries and contract provisions.

“At this point, on March 2nd, I don’t see us stopping the motion tomorrow at JFAC,” Nonini said.

Like this story? Get more! Sign up for our free newsletters.