EDITORIAL: Where the red tape grows
In a state that has long prided itself on limited government intervention and reducing bureaucratic red tape, Senate Bill 1403, passed in 2024, stands as a puzzling contradiction to Idaho's traditional values.
This legislation, ostensibly designed to clarify city growth boundaries, instead creates unnecessary complications for municipalities in North Idaho that have historically managed their development cooperatively and efficiently.
For decades, North Idaho cities like Post Falls, Coeur d'Alene and Hayden have collaborated on areas of impact, which are the designated zones where cities anticipate future growth.
As Post Falls Mayor Ron Jacobson described it, SB 1403 is "a solution for a problem that didn't exist." The previous system wasn't broken, particularly in North Idaho where inter-city cooperation has been the norm.
What's troubling about this legislation’s impact is its timing. North Idaho currently faces a housing shortage, with demand far outstripping supply and driving up costs for residents. The region needs streamlined processes to develop new housing, not additional regulatory hurdles.
By imposing arbitrary 2-mile limits on areas of impact and mandating that cities demonstrate likelihood of growth within an unrealistic five-year timeline, the Legislature has created a planning nightmare for municipalities.
Coeur d'Alene is already anticipating a shrinking of its area of impact, potentially limiting its ability to plan for future growth.
The practical implications for housing development are significant. Developers now face a more fragmented regulatory landscape where infrastructure requirements may change from city to county jurisdictions, creating confusion and increasing costs.
As Post Falls deputy city administrator Warren Wilson noted, "It becomes a bit of a mystery how to draw this map."
This uncertainty will inevitably translate into delays in housing projects at a time when every new home matters.
Moreover, the looming deadline for cities to revise their areas of impact creates unnecessary time pressure. City resources that could be directed toward addressing the housing crisis must instead be diverted to navigating this new regulatory maze.
Perhaps most concerning is the legislation's shift away from broader planning considerations. Previously, cities could plan for areas where annexation may never occur but where land use changes could impact city residents. The new narrower focus potentially sacrifices thoughtful, long-term regional planning for a more rigid approach — exactly the kind of shortsighted thinking that good urban planning should avoid.
Idaho has traditionally been a state that values local control and minimal government intervention. SB 1403 represents a departure from these principles, imposing state solutions on local issues that were already being handled effectively. In attempting to provide clarity, the Legislature has created confusion. In trying to solve problems, it has created new ones.
As North Idaho struggles to meet housing demand and accommodate growth, this legislation represents an unfortunate step backward. Rather than streamlining development processes, it adds layers of complexity that will inevitably slow housing development and potentially worsen the housing crisis.
The Legislature would do well to consider revisiting this law before its unintended consequences further complicate North Idaho's efforts to address its housing needs. Sometimes the best government action is restraint, a lesson that, in this case, seems forgotten.