WHAT’S HAPPENING
House Bill 842 seeks to fundamentally alter how local jurisdictions manage property tax budgets. Key provisions include:
-
Taxing District Restrictions: Eliminates the preliminary levy rate for new construction and removes the ability of districts to reserve future forgone property taxes.
-
Budget Caps: Raises the annual cap on property tax budget growth for cities under 30,000 residents from 8% to 15%.
-
Budget Referendums: Most critically, the bill allows city and county property tax budgets to be reduced via the voter initiative and referendum process.
IDAHO ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES (IAC) POSITION
Our partners at the IAC strongly oppose HB 842. Their opposition is centered on the language (page 5, lines 9-24) that subjects county property tax budgets to the initiative and referendum process.
The IAC believes this provision is unconstitutional. Legal precedent established in Weldon v. Bonner County Tax Coalition (1993) clarifies that:
-
The approval of county property tax budgets is an administrative act, not a legislative one.
- The Idaho Supreme Court unanimously ruled that initiatives and referendums apply only to "acts" or "measures" passed by a legislative body.
-
Budgets are an administrative function of the board of county commissioners and are therefore exempt from these processes.
ASSOCIATION OF IDAHO CITIES (AIC) POSITION
Our partners at AIC strongly oppose HB 842. While the bill was intended to address ongoing issues with HB 389, the AIC reports that their professional recommendations were largely ignored.
The AIC defines this legislation as a "poisoned pill" for Idaho cities:
-
Budgetary Sabotage: The most critical concern is the introduction of the citizen initiative process to reduce city budgets. This would force municipalities into constant budget reduction battles, creating extreme instability for local leadership and public services.
-
Ignored Solutions: AIC’s proposal for a tiered cap system (based on population) and restoring annexation/new construction values to 100% was excluded from the final bill.
-
Operational Risk: By allowing initiatives to undo administrative budget decisions, this bill complicates the essential work of municipal governance and long-term planning.
AIC leadership encourages members to contact the House Revenue & Taxation Committee immediately and urge them to stop this bill from moving forward.
WHY THIS MATTERS TO PLANNERS
For Idaho’s planners, fiscal predictability is the backbone of sound infrastructure and capital improvement planning.
-
Infrastructure Risk: Subjecting administrative budgets to referendums creates extreme volatility, making it nearly impossible for municipalities to plan for long-term growth, transportation, and public services.
-
Legal Instability: Passing legislation that contradicts established Idaho Supreme Court rulings invites costly litigation for the very taxpayers the bill claims to protect.
-
Loss of Planning Tools: Eliminating the ability to reserve forgone taxes removes a critical tool used by local governments to manage fluctuating economic cycles and infrastructure needs.
| 
