Some city, county officials say this bill would mean a ‘free-for-all’ for developers
Facing unprecedented growth, cities across Idaho are fighting each other for areas to expand.
A bill in the Idaho Legislature aims to end debates about which cities can annex which properties into their city limits. The bill would place the decision in the hands of property owners.
House Bill 635 would ease annexation restrictions on landowners, allowing them to be annexed by any neighboring city, not just whichever city has already made clear its intention to annex the land eventually by including it in that city’s area of impact.
Areas of impact are defined by Idaho law as areas that cities anticipate annexing. They are designed to foster the efficient planning and economical delivery of urban services to growing areas.
Rep. Doug Okuniewicz, R-Hayden, sponsored House Bill 635 and said it came seeing North Idaho cities Hayden, Rathrum, Post Falls and Coeur d’Alene fight over annexations.
But the bill would affect the Treasure Valley, too. Star and Middleton are fighting in court over which city gets to annex certain properties between them.
Areas of impact are legally defined areas where a city anticipates growing and extending services.
Cities can establish areas of impact through negotiations with their county.
Okuniewicz’s bill would allow property owners to annex into any city they want regardless of a city’s area of impact.
“If you have two cities that are arguing over who gets to annex the ground ... the deciding factor should be the landowner,” Okuniewicz said during a committee hearing.
Developers testify in favor of annexation ease
A handful of developers testified in favor of the bill during the Feb. 24 committee hearing.
Jim Hunter, owner of Boise Hunter Homes, said he was in favor of annexation regardless of city impact area, because it would allow property owners to annex into whatever city they want.
Travis Hunter, Jim Hunter’s son, who also works for Boise Hunter Homes, said the bill would allow property owners to annex “where they are welcome.”
The Hunters said if a property is in one city’s area of impact but is blocked from that city by county land that is not yet annexed, the property owner would have to wait years for the properties next to it to be annexed before the owner could go through the annexation process too.
If that same property is next to a different city, without any county land in between, the property owner should be able to annex into that city instead, they said.
In a phone call after the committee meeting, Middleton Mayor Steve Rule told the Idaho Statesman that there was a way around the Hunters’ concerns — something called preannexation.
Middleton has a preannexation agreement, where properties inside the area of impact that want to be annexed into the city but are blocked by intervening land can connect to city services as part of the agreement.
“They can get approval on annexations, even if it is not contiguous, if they build to Middleton city standards,” Rule said by phone. “Because (annexation) is imminent, those areas in between (the property and the city) will be contiguous in a year or two if not five to six.”
Star Mayor Trevor Chadwick spoke in favor of the bill during the committee hearing, saying he was happy to support private property owners’ rights.
One mayor calls the bill ‘unbridled annexation’
Rule said the bill would result in inefficient planning and sprawl, problems that Idaho’s Local Land Use Act, the law that requires cities to maintain comprehensive plans and impact areas, was designed to combat.
“If 635 is passed, at that point it is unbridled annexation and development driven by developers and landowners,” Rule said. “It literally takes away any impact areas by any city. I believe it is in contradiction to city and county comprehensive plans because you get a landowner that wants to annex into any city, and you go.”
In a lawsuit filed in November, Middleton claimed Star illegally annexed a quarter square mile of property in Middleton’s area of impact. Middleton wants to stop any future annexations by Star in its area of impact.
“It is a huge power play and land grab by the city of Star,” Rule said. “If it is signed, they will bully their way in any direction, toward Boise, toward Eagle and Nampa.”
The Hunters told the legislative committee that they did not have a stake in the Middleton lawsuit against Star.
In a county commission meeting, Canyon County Commissioner Keri Smith encouraged county residents to call their representatives to oppose the bill.
The bill passed the House 64-4, with two representatives absent. It will go to the Senate Local Government and Taxation committee, headed by Sen. Jim Rice, R-Caldwell.
“If we want any controlled growth, that legislative move would hurt us,” Smith said. “It would be a free-for-all for developers. If they are contiguous, they would be free to annex into anyone’s impact area. I would encourage any of us who care about some type of smart growth to reach out to your senators and ask Jim Rice not to let that bill make it to the floor.”
During the committee meeting, no other mayors or city representatives spoke about the bill.
Rice, reached by phone Tuesday, said he has meetings scheduled with city and county representatives.
“I want to take a good look at it before we are going to hear it,” he said. “I want to see if my committee have any thoughts before it comes before us.”
This story was originally published March 10, 2022 at 10:34 AM.
