Adds to existing law to prohibit laws that require electric vehicle charging stations or parking spaces in any building plan and to provide for preemption of local laws and ordinances.
Summary
House Bill 86 amends the Idaho Building Code Act by adding a new section that bars the state and local governments from requiring electric vehicle-related infrastructure to be included in building plans. Specifically, it prohibits mandates for EV charging stations, designated EV parking spaces, upgraded electrical conduit, or similar infrastructure intended to support future EV charger installation. The bill also states that these new limits apply notwithstanding any other law to the contrary.
The measure is written as a preemption bill, meaning it overrides conflicting local ordinances, rules, or regulations that would otherwise require EV-ready features in building plans. It includes an emergency clause, so if enacted it would take effect immediately upon passage and approval rather than waiting for a standard delayed effective date.
Impact
This bill would add Section 39-4109B to Title 39, Chapter 41 of the Idaho Code and would constrain both state and local authority over building-plan requirements related to electric vehicle infrastructure. It would prevent cities, counties, and other political subdivisions from imposing EV charging or EV-ready construction mandates as part of permitting or development review, and it would supersede any existing local laws or regulations that do so. The practical effect is to limit regulatory requirements on builders and developers and to preserve optional, rather than mandatory, EV infrastructure installation in new construction or redevelopment plans.
Sentiment
The voting history suggests the bill had generally favorable support in both chambers. It passed the House on third reading by a vote of 61-9 and the Senate on third reading by a vote of 28-7, indicating a clear majority in favor but not unanimous agreement. No committee transcript was provided, so the available record shows support through the floor votes but does not reveal detailed debate or amendments.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely the balance between state preemption and local control, especially whether governments should be allowed to require EV-ready infrastructure in building plans as part of broader energy, transportation, or climate policy goals. Supporters appear to favor limiting mandates on builders and preventing a patchwork of local requirements, while opponents likely object to removing local flexibility and to the bill’s restriction on policies that could encourage EV adoption and future infrastructure readiness. The emergency clause may also be notable because it accelerates implementation immediately upon enactment.