Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Title Ix Administration topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee introduces Pickett measure assigning Title IX administration to university presidents; fiscal questions raised
Summary
Representative Doug Pickett introduced RS 32,107 proposing that responsibility for Title IX be assigned to university presidents at Idaho’s public universities; committee members supported introduction but raised concerns about reporting burden and fiscal impact for mandated reports.
BOISE — The Idaho House Committee on Education moved RS 32,107 to introduction after Representative Doug Pickett told the committee the RS would assign responsibility for the administration of Title IX at public universities to each institution’s president.
“Title IX has become controversial in its application,” Pickett said. He described the RS as a straightforward assignment of accountability: “this RS simply proposes that the application of Title IX within our universities be assigned directly to the president of the university,” he said, adding that the change aims to return the statute to its original focus.
Representative Ehart asked whether a specific problem in the university system was driving the proposal and whether the intent was to clarify who is responsible so stakeholders would know where to direct concerns. Representative Pickett said the intent was to place accountability “at the highest level” to ensure consistent administration.
Committee members also flagged practical implications. Representative Mathias noted a provision on page 2, subsection 3 that he said would likely impose state costs because university presidents would need to prepare and submit Title IX reports. Mathias asked how the fiscal note would be reconciled with language suggesting no cost to the state. Pickett acknowledged the point and said he would work on that issue before a hearing.
Representative Gardner moved to introduce RS 32,107; the motion carried on voice vote and the committee agreed to proceed with the RS for further consideration.
The RS was introduced and will proceed to the committee hearing process; committee members requested clearer fiscal language and indicated the sponsor would consider revisions before any hearing.
