Make money doing the work you believe in
Idaho Legislature – VOTE NO on S1354 - Accessory dwelling units (Posted: 03/20/26)
Link: legislature.idaho.gov/s…
See bill link above for current status and committee assignment
See Idaho Insider for links where you can send group emails based on current status and committee assignment: gemstatechronicle.com/l…
Idaho legislators have proposed several concerning bills regarding housing and land use. Their intention is to increase “affordable housing,” something government always fails at and should NOT be tinkering with. While the newer versions (some amended) of these bills generally are less restrictive than their predecessors, they still represent a state takeover of local property and land use matters, have NO place in Idaho, and must be stopped.
Summary (ai assisted)
S1354 amends Idaho Code Section 55-3212 on homeowners’ association restrictions and adds Section 67-6541 on city regulations for accessory dwelling units (ADUs), to take effect July 1, 2026.
Engrossed version of bill: legislature.idaho.gov/w…
S1354 amendment: legislature.idaho.gov/w…
Grok summary of S1354: grok.com/share/c2hhcmQt… (Note: Summary below corrects some mistakes by Grok.)
Homeowners’ Associations (Section 55-3212)
“No homeowner's association shall add, amend, or enforce any covenant, condition, or restriction in such a way that limits or prohibits accessory dwelling units, as defined in section 67-6541, Idaho Code, on any property, land, or structure thereon within the jurisdiction of a homeowner's association, unless the owner of the affected property expressly agrees in writing to such addition or amendment of a covenant, condition, or restriction. Nothing in this section shall be construed to prevent the enforcement of valid covenants, conditions, or restrictions limiting or prohibiting a property owner's right to transfer an interest in land or the structures thereon where such covenant, condition, or restriction existed and applied to the property at the time the property owner acquired an interest in the property.”
In English, the above means: Homeowner associations (HOAs) in Idaho cannot restrict or ban accessory dwelling units (per Idaho Code 67-6541) unless the property owner explicitly agrees in writing. Pre-existing valid restrictions on property transfer remain enforceable.
HOAs may adopt reasonable rules on use of ADUs otherwise allowed by law, including but not limited to architectural design consistent with the primary dwelling, size limits, height limits, setback requirements, open space requirements, parking controls, and bedroom requirements.
Does not apply to certain rentals defined in section 63-1803(4), Idaho Code.
Cities (Section 67-6541)
Cannot ban ADUs in residential zones; ADUs classified as residential use.
Applies only to cities over 10,000 population.
By February 1, 2027, must amend plans to allow one internal or one detached ADU per lot.
Prohibits:
Extra parking requirements in most cases.
Higher impact/utility fees.
Size limits under 1,000 sq ft or 75% of primary dwelling.
Owner-occupancy rules.
Height limits below primary dwelling.
Stricter setbacks/lot coverage than single-family dwellings.
Requires administrative approval for compliant projects; standards must be clear and objective.
Does not supersede health, safety, building, or environmental laws.
ADU defined as self-contained unit on same lot as primary dwelling; internal, attached, or detached; excludes vehicles/tiny homes on wheels.
Cities may adopt less restrictive rules.
_________
Reason for Recommendation to VOTE NO on S1354
S1354, despite its more relaxed requirements and a clause that allows cities to enact “milder regulations,” still represents a state takeover of decision-making about land use and property rights of individuals, HOAs, and local jurisdictions (cities, planning and zoning, etc.).
The bill still favors utilitarian concepts of "affordable or infill housing." It usurps local control over property and character of a place, and erodes private property rights. It could reduce property values (and thus taxes to counties and cities, likely leading to tax increases to make up the shortfall). And it could erode the quality of life many who fled other states hoped to find in Idaho.
Other states where such collectivist legislation has been enacted failed to yield affordable housing, destroyed the character of single-family home residential neighborhoods, trounced individual property rights and values, blighted areas that were once beautiful, and directly or indirectly caused people (and their tax money) to flee. Do we really want this fate to befall Idaho? Here is a ChatGPT conversation link about negative effects elsewhere of similar measures. We have not removed ChatGPT biases or edited the conversation:
State government should be protecting individual property rights and local control; not destroying them. This bill and any like it must be stopped. Please VOTE NO on S1354 and all other bills that attempt to have the state legislate "affordable housing."
Related
Idaho Legislature 2026 Bills to Support or Oppose: tinyurl.com/yc2jpkeh
