States findings of the Legislature and rejects certain rules of the Idaho Department of Lands relating to state grazing leases.
Summary
SCR112 is a concurrent resolution that uses the Legislature’s authority to reject an administrative rule adopted by the Idaho Department of Lands. The resolution specifically targets IDAPA 20.03.14, Section 050, Subsection 02, within the rules governing grazing, farming, conservation, noncommercial recreation, and communication site leases. The Legislature states that the rule is inconsistent with legislative intent because it allows a state grazing lease to be canceled with only six months’ notice.
If adopted, the resolution declares that the challenged rule is rejected and has no force or effect beginning July 1, 2025. In practical terms, the measure would prevent the Department of Lands from enforcing that particular lease-cancellation provision and would preserve the Legislature’s position that state grazing leases should not be terminable on that short notice under the rejected rule.
Impact
The resolution would nullify one specific administrative rule in the Idaho Department of Lands’ leasing regulations, affecting state grazing leases and related lease categories covered by IDAPA 20.03.14. It does not amend the underlying statute directly, but it uses the Legislature’s statutory authority under Idaho Code section 67-5291 to disapprove an agency rule. The immediate legal effect is to remove the challenged rule from operation as of July 1, 2025, which would affect the Department of Lands’ administration of grazing lease cancellations and could provide greater stability for leaseholders.
Sentiment
The available context suggests generally favorable legislative sentiment toward the resolution, with the bill framed as a correction to an agency rule viewed as inconsistent with legislative intent. Because there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes provided, there is no evidence of organized opposition in the supplied materials. The resolution’s language indicates a clear legislative preference for rejecting the rule rather than modifying it.
Contention
The central point of contention is the Department of Lands’ rule allowing state grazing leases to be canceled with six months’ notice. Supporters of the resolution appear to view that notice period as too short and inconsistent with legislative intent, while the rejected rule likely reflects the agency’s administrative approach to lease management. The dispute is therefore between legislative oversight of agency rulemaking and the Department’s authority to set lease terms for grazing, farming, conservation, recreation, and communication site leases.