Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Education Funding Earmarks topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee introduces proposal to require school appropriations be spent for their stated purpose
Summary
Representative Kyle Harris introduced RS 32540, a short draft that would require state appropriations to public and charter schools be spent only for the purpose stated in the bill language. Lawmakers asked for details on auditing and administrative cost implications.
Representative Kyle Harris, R-District 7, introduced RS 32540 in the Idaho House Education Committee on March 3, 2025. The draft states that money appropriated by the Legislature to public and charter schools must be used for the purpose specified in the appropriation language.
Harris told the committee the measure is "pretty cut and dry" and aimed to prevent state funds earmarked for a specific purpose from being diverted to other uses. "So math and science money to go with math and science and nothing else," he said.
Committee members raised practical questions about auditing and administrative burdens. Representative Church asked how the current auditing process works and who would enforce the restriction. Harris said he would provide information at a later date. Representative Nelson questioned whether the accounting and monitoring costs could outweigh the amounts at issue, giving examples of small local savings and community contributions that could make strict line-item enforcement costly.
Harris said the Legislative Services Office (LSO) already audits school spending and that under the draft earmarked funds could be used for any purpose that fit the stated category (for example, a broad "maintenance" appropriation could cover multiple maintenance items). "We have an auditing department in LSO that audits all this money and how it's being spent already. So I don't think it's really gonna cost us anything extra," Harris told the committee.
Representative Hawkins moved to introduce RS 32540; the motion carried. Several members said they expected to request more detail about fiscal and auditing procedures before a full hearing.
The draft does not specify enforcement mechanics, penalties, or new auditing personnel; sponsors told the committee those details can be developed during the bill-drafting and hearing process.
