Property rights vs. peace and quiet? Idaho could cut rules on short-term rentals

State legislators are targeting short-term rental regulations from both sides of the statehouse, with the House and Senate each pursuing bills that would curb local jurisdictions’ ability to restrict regulations by Idaho counties and cities.

House Bill 583, which advanced out of the Business Committee on Monday, would demand that cities and counties treat short-term rentals like any other homes, stripping almost all local requirements for inspections, parking, fire safety and licensing. A separate Senate proposal, which as of Monday was still awaiting a committee hearing, would also cut regulations but would allow cities to license larger operations.

In a hearing before the House committee, advocates for the House language argued that short-term rentals through platforms like AirBnb and VRBO are not in fact businesses but residences under Idaho law — and cities have pushed too far to control how hosts use their homes.

The proposal bolsters a 2017 law generally barring cities from passing laws to limit short-term rentals. The original law only allows local regulations to “safeguard public health, safety and general welfare.” Since then AirBnb advocates claim that some cities — particularly those in tourist-heavy areas — have implemented de facto bans through burdensome requirements and expensive demands under the guise of public health.

“Many cities in our state have, unfortunately, interrupted Idaho Code,” said House Business Committee Chairman Jordan Redman, R-Coeur d’Alene. Redman, who along with a handful of other representatives disclosed business interests in short-term rentals, cosponsored the bill alongside House Speaker Mike Moyle, R-Star.

Redman said that the legislation is the result of a three-year process attempting to strike a balance between “economic opportunity” and “neighborhood integrity.”

“This is just part of restoring private property rights back to our constituents,” Redman told the committee Monday. “… I think the localest control is the property owner.”

The amendment targets nearly every angle cities have found to work around state law and leaves the barest features of public safety behind. Cities can, but don’t have to, require smoke detectors, carbon monoxide alarms and fire extinguishers. They can also require the owner to provide portable egress ladders and a diagram of the home with exits, fire extinguishers and first-aid kits marked for renters. And they can limit the capacity of a home to whatever the building code states it would be if it were occupied by full-time residents.

Requiring major changes — particularly any that would require significant money — would be expressly banned. That outlaws modifications to the home itself, including extra parking or sewer capacity, fire sprinklers, additional entrances or exits, or upgrades to meet current building codes.

The bill also removes administrative requirements like licensing, inspection, additional insurance thresholds, professional management mandates and conditional-use permits. Caps on the number of short-term rentals, as well as any limits on their concentration or rules around owner-occupancy, would be banned.

Boise is among the cities that would have to change its policy should the House bill pass.

In 2022, the city began requiring an $80 annual license per short-term rental. The license requires an applicant to register the owner’s name or the name of a local representative, physical address, phone number, email address, information on safety equipment, and a description of the property being rented. It also asks for information on parking availability and proof of insurance, which could come from the broader rental platform.

As of Monday, Boise had nearly 2,000 active short-term rentals, according to the rental analytics firm AirDNA.

“Licensing ensures basic safety precautions are met and protects both the public welfare and the character of Boise’s neighborhoods,” the city states on its website. “Licensing also helps city staff gather critical information on housing and short-term rentals.”

Airbnb advocates, neighbors spar over rules

Other cities, like McCall and Lava Hot Springs, require much more — and the demands have gone too far, according to those in favor of the bill.

“Idaho has long valued private property rights, limited government and personal responsibility,” said Aaron Catt, a Boise property manager. “Short-term rentals are not corporate takeovers of neighborhoods. They’re overwhelmingly owned by Idahoans who live here, work here and vote here.”

Catt was one in a chorus of property managers, owners and Realtors. in favor of deregulation. An attorney representing AirBnb testified in favor of lifting restrictions, too.

Others, though, spoke out in favor of keeping restrictions intact — or, at least, allowing local governments to be the judge.

Gregory Irvine said his neighbor’s popular rental in McCall created an “intolerable environment” until Valley County implemented some of the most strident restrictions in the state.

“It’s been like living next to a resort hotel,” he said. “No, a fraternity house.”

To Irvine, the people who live in a town are “best qualified” to make the rules.

“The full-time residents of our communities should be afforded at least equal rights” to enjoy their home, he said. “When a short-term rental comes in, they have short-term people. … They have no concern about neighbors.”

The bill would still allow Irvine to complain to authorities if a neighbor’s party gets too loud.

“You can call the police,” said attorney Jeremy Chou of Boise firm Givens Pursley, who represented Airbnb. “That’s really what the police do.”

Other problems affect more than immediate neighbors. Bruce Ard is mayor of Island Park, a lakeside resort town on the road to Yellowstone Park and Wyoming border. He himself owns rental properties. But he opposes the bill. Island Park is spending $10 million to mitigate water contamination because high-use vacation rentals overwhelmed the small-scale septic systems originally installed for weekend cabins.

Ard’s city could still enforce sanitation requirements already in code.

But, as Rep. Steve Berch said, those protections “are only as good as a local government’s ability to respond.” The Boise Democrat opposed the bill as drafted, though he said he may change his mind when it’s discussed on the House floor.

“I have a feeling that this is going to be the single most difficult bill that I’ll vote on,” he said.

To Berch, “this clearly is a business issue.” The bill, he noted, was before the Business Committee, and he worried the bill favored too heavily owners who wanted to “turn a residential neighborhood into a quasi-business district.”

When you’re living next to a noisy short-term rental, he said, “every day is Groundhog Day.”

Rep. Jeff Cornilles, R-Nampa, experienced that at a second home outside McCall. Short-term rentals are not just a state issue, he said, but something that changes the fabric of a community.

“Property management does not come out at 2 a.m.” when a party wakes the neighbors, he said. “I’ve made that call. The sheriff will come out, if they can get to it. And right now, in Valley County at 2 a.m., there aren’t that many sheriffs.”

The bill now heads to the full House.

This story was originally published February 10, 2026 at 3:46 PM.