Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Oilseed Rules topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Idaho Oilseed Commission presents administrative‑rule rewrite, removes refund application pending advisory vote
Summary
The Idaho Oilseed Commission presented a rewrite of IDAPA rules to remove an administrative refund application provision that conflicted with Idaho Code. The commission plans an advisory vote of growers this year; the committee will vote on the pending rule at a later meeting.
The Idaho Oilseed Commission told the Senate Agricultural Affairs Committee it removed a refund-application provision from its administrative rules because the provision conflicted with Idaho statute and prior grower referendum language.
Pachi Laricia Phillips, a staff member for the Idaho Oilseed Commission, presented the IDAPA chapter rewrite (listed in materials as IDAPA 43.01.01.2401) and said the rewrite primarily removes duplicative language and shortens existing administrative rule. Phillips said one specific change removes a refund-application process that, under Idaho Code, should be eliminated if growers previously approved continuation of the commission in a referendum.
Phillips said the commission consulted the Division of Financial Management and held two negotiated-rulemaking meetings (Aug. 22 and Oct. 3) and an open meeting for growers and dealers before filing the pending rule. She said an affidavit from former commission chairman Doug Scoville is included in the committee packet and that the affidavit indicates a referendum was held pursuant to Idaho Code; that status created a conflict between statute and the administrative refund provision.
“I can't attest or find evidence that any such vote or advisory vote or advisory poll has happened with the Oilseed Commission,” Phillips said of prior five‑year advisory votes; she added she has worked for the commission since October 2023 and that the commission plans to conduct an advisory vote this year and report results to the committee next year.
Committee members asked clarifying questions about the statutory language and frequency of the advisory vote. Phillips said the statute prescribes an advisory vote every five years and that the commission will hold the vote this year to determine whether growers support continuation of the commission and to assess effectiveness.
The committee did not take final action on the pending rule at this meeting; the vice chair said the committee will vote on the rule at a later meeting so a senator who could not attend could watch the meeting video before voting.
