Ethics probe to look at senator, his liquor bill

History was made in the Idaho Senate on Friday as a six-senator ethics committee convened to consider a complaint against Sen. Jack Noble, R-Kuna.

Noble introduced a bill to rewrite a section of state liquor laws to permit his own convenience store to sell liquor, even though it’s across the street from an elementary school, without revealing that he was bringing the bill on his own behalf.

Under mounting pressure, Noble submitted the complaint himself, writing, “I wish to clear my name.”

On the floor of the Senate, shortly before the panel convened, Noble launched an attack against Idaho Statesman reporter Dan Popkey, whose reporting on the issue brought it to light.

“I want you to know … his objective is to bring or sow discord amongst this body,” Noble told the Senate. “Mr. Popkey wrote a story … less than half a truth so help him God,” Noble said. “I just hope that each and every one of you will think about it, look at it.”

Noble faced TV cameras as he left the Senate, and he insisted that the bill he introduced wouldn’t have allowed his Melba convenience store, Jacksmart, to get a liquor license, because he said he could get one right now. He claimed his store is 500 feet away from the elementary school across the street.

That would have been the result of SB 1085, which would have redefined how distance is measured between liquor stores and elementary schools. Current law says liquor can’t be sold within 300 feet of a school. Though it’s only about 40 feet across the street, Noble’s bill would have required measuring from entrance door to entrance door, thus resulting in the longer distance.

Noble said, “I decided to author this in order to clear it up, so that the liquor dispensary was no longer defining it as they liked.”

After its investigation, the committee could recommend dismissing the ethics charge against Noble, reprimanding him, censure, or expulsion from the Senate. Expulsion from the Senate would take a two-thirds vote.

The last time the Senate had an ethics committee was 1990, when Sen. Larrey Anderson filed a complaint against Sen. John Peavey for going through his mail. Peavey had taken Anderson’s large bulk-mailing into his office to count it and complained that it violated Senate mailing rules by including more than 400 letters. That ethics committee found no violation either by Peavey or Anderson.

Charge ‘em room and board?

About 100 Idaho prison inmates each year refuse parole, opting instead to serve out their full terms and get out with no conditions or oversight.

State Commission on Pardons and Parole Director Olivia Craven told JFAC last week that offenders need treatment programs to change their behavior – and those who opt against parole also typically refuse treatment.

“The bottom line is these people do not want to address their problems because they do not want to change,” Craven said.

Rep. Margaret Henbest, D-Boise, asked how inmates can get away with refusing parole.

If they do so, she suggested, “We ought to be charging them room and board” as long as they remain in prison. Craven said, “A couple years ago we forced two people out that said they didn’t want parole. They both came back with new felonies within months.”

Not really pretty flowers

Jim Caswell, head of Idaho’s office of species conservation, brought a big vase of what looked like colorful flowers with him to the Joint Finance-Appropriations Committee on Thursday – but it was actually plastic reproductions of various noxious weeds that are found in Idaho.

“This is star thistle, knapweed, dalmation toadflax, leafy spurge,” Caswell said, pointing out the leafy blooms.

Gov. Dirk Kempthorne’s recommended budget for Caswell’s agency includes $82,900 to add a state invasive species coordinator to implement a new plan for keeping all invasive species out of Idaho. But budget panel members wondered whether there was money to add the position next year.

Immigration bill goes down

Legislation promoted by the Idaho Association of Counties to limit payment for medical care of indigents who aren’t legal residents went down in a Senate committee Wednesday, after a long, intense hearing.

Citizens, hospitals, doctors and more all came out against the bill, saying it would just shift costs from one payer to another.