Amends and adds to existing law to revise a definition and permit residential chicken ownership.
Summary
Senate Bill 1026 revises Idaho’s urban agriculture law and adds a new section governing backyard chickens. It updates the statutory definition of “urban farming” to clarify that it can include indoor controlled-environment production such as hydroponics and aquaponics, and it may involve the responsible rearing of small-scale livestock or poultry to support food production goals. The bill also makes a technical correction to existing definitions related to community gardening, market gardening, and victory gardening.
The bill’s main policy change is to prohibit deed restrictions, covenants, or similar private land-use agreements from barring ownership or pasturing of up to four chickens per 0.2 acre on qualifying single-family residential properties. Homeowners’ associations would still be allowed to adopt reasonable rules about chicken housing and pasturing, including restrictions on roosters, and the law would not apply to multifamily housing, agricultural zones, rural properties, farms, or hobby farms where poultry is already allowed by zoning. The act is declared an emergency and would take effect July 1, 2025.
Impact
If enacted, the bill would amend Section 22-1002 of the Idaho Code and add new Section 22-1003 to Chapter 10, Title 22, creating a statewide limit on how far private deed restrictions can go in preventing backyard chicken ownership on certain residential lots. It would affect homeowners, HOAs, developers, and property owners by limiting enforceability of restrictive covenants in this narrow context, while preserving local zoning authority and HOA rulemaking over reasonable conditions. The bill also broadens and clarifies Idaho’s urban agriculture definitions, which may matter for future interpretation of programs or policies tied to community gardens, market gardening, and urban farming.
Sentiment
The available voting history suggests the bill had generally favorable support in the Senate, passing third reading 28-6. The absence of committee transcript excerpts limits insight into detailed debate, but the broad margin indicates the measure was viewed positively by most senators. The bill’s framing around urban agriculture, food production, and limited residential chicken ownership likely contributed to its support.
Contention
The main point of contention is the bill’s intrusion into private property agreements and homeowners’ association authority. Opponents may object to overriding deed restrictions and covenants, even in a limited way, while supporters likely view the measure as a reasonable expansion of residential self-sufficiency and urban agriculture. A secondary issue is the scope of the allowance: the bill sets a specific density limit, excludes roosters through HOA rules, and does not apply to multifamily housing or already-permitted agricultural and rural properties, reflecting an attempt to balance neighborhood concerns with poultry ownership rights.