David Ferdinand — David Ferdinand, a Canyon County resident from Nampa and president of the Canyon County Regional Realtors, testified in support of Senate Bill 1280. He asked the committee for a positive vote, then responded to a question about historic duplex subdivisions by noting that the trend was before his time in real estate. He explained that, based on his long experience in Canyon County, Boise, and Nampa helping people purchase property, the bill’s concept of allowing more use from a piece of property could help builders and local governments create appropriate subdivisions and support affordable housing.
Commissioner Orton — Referenced as someone with relevant practical knowledge on the issue.
Tracy Casper — The chair notes Tracy Casper is listed to testify, but she does not appear to speak here.
Director Michael Hampton — Identified as being present from PERSI and invited to comment on Senate Bill 1276.
Mike Hampton — Introduces himself as the director of PERSI and explains the bill opens the pool to already-retired individuals without changing retirement patterns.
Robert Fick — Introduced as the next presenter on a COLA/PERSI topic.
Bob Fick — Introduces himself as a volunteer for the Retired Public Employees of Idaho and frames the presentation on PERSI and COLA impacts.
Dave High — Identified as a retired Deputy Attorney General whose concerns and analysis are being presented.
David High — David High introduces himself as a former Idaho Deputy Attorney General and notes his prior work with PERSI and representation of Retired Public Employees of Idaho. He then explains retirement plan funding, emphasizing that a plan needs sufficient money to provide a reasonable retirement and that funding comes from two sources: contributions and investment earnings. He further notes that higher investment returns reduce the amount of contributions needed, while lower returns require higher contributions.
Daniel Foreman — Voted aye on the motion.
Daniel Foreman — Voted aye on the motion.
Daniel Foreman — Voted aye on the motion.
Daniel Foreman — Chairman Daniel Foreman is addressed repeatedly during a single procedural exchange in which a member asks a quick question, the chair responds, and the discussion continues with clarification about COLA authority and mechanics involving Senator Foreman and Senator Guthrie.
Daniel Foreman — The senator first moved to approve the minutes, then was welcomed to present Senate Bill 1277. Ben Taves, State Senator for District 4, introduced the bill as a set of housing solutions aimed at expanding housing options, including allowing accessory dwelling units statewide. Later, another speaker referenced Senator Taves’s earlier comments while discussing housing pressures on residents, such as rising property taxes, multigenerational living arrangements, and caregiving needs.
Daniel Foreman — Is addressed in the introduction to the next witness.
Kiki Miller — Testified in support of ADUs on behalf of the Housing Solutions Partnership and described local housing efforts in Kootenai County.
Madeline Clark — Madeline Clark, a senior policy analyst with Mountain States Policy Center, introduces herself and begins her testimony on SB 1277, thanking the committee for the opportunity to speak.
Trevor Chadwick — Trevor Chadwick, mayor of the City of Star, testifies in opposition to the legislation. He argues that allowing ADUs by right would strain local sewer, water, and treatment infrastructure and impose significant fiscal burdens on communities. He cites Star’s ongoing $60 million plant upgrade as an example of the costly impacts local governments would face, emphasizing that already tight municipal budgets would be further stressed. He concludes his testimony and is then invited to answer questions.
Trevor Chadwick — Trevor Chadwick, mayor of Star, testified that the bill needs amendments because it lacks safeguards to keep housing affordable. He said the city already works with developers on lot sizes but cannot control market outcomes, noting that home size and development decisions are market-driven. He warned that corporate entities have bought approved subdivisions in Star and converted them to rentals, and urged limits on such purchases and other protections, such as deed restrictions, to ensure developments remain affordable and are built as intended.
Mr. Chadwick — Testified that the bill's language is concerning because it could be interpreted in a way that leads to lawsuits.
Mayor Chadwick — Mayor Chadwick expresses concern that the bill’s wording could expose anyone involved to lawsuits, says the issue needs to be worked through collaboratively to avoid future problems, and explains that while the city could establish the provisions by ordinance, it does not currently do so because of infrastructure challenges.
Mayor Chadwick — Mayor Chadwick is cited as making a useful point about market-driven housing outcomes, specifically that market forces can turn ownership housing into rental housing.
Tammy Nichols — Senator Nichols frames the discussion around housing policy and the need for solutions, then later makes a motion to send Senate Bill 1277 to the amendment order, which is seconded by Senator Zito.
Tammy Nichols — Senator Nichols moved to send Senate Bill 1279 to the amending order for possible amendments. The chair then announced the motion and opened further discussion. Nichols continued by speaking in support of the discussion, noting that many apartments are being built while people still cannot afford housing.
Mr. Mayor — Says he is open to amendments and explains that the bill reflects only one committee's ideas from the task force.
Jim Guthrie — Seeks clarification that the witness is open to amendments.
Jim Guthrie — Asks whether the city could already do everything in the bill through local ordinances.
Jim Guthrie — Asks what 'unreasonably restricts' means in the bill.
Jim Guthrie — Referenced as part of the motion discussion in the committee.
Jim Guthrie — Introduced as the next speaker and thanked the chair for a substitute motion.
Jim Guthrie — Makes the substitute motion to hold Senate Bill 1277 in committee.
Jim Guthrie — Recognized to speak to the motion after it is seconded.
Jim Guthrie — Argues that cities spend significant time planning growth and infrastructure, and that local control should be respected.
Jim Guthrie — Continues arguing that the bill would usurp local control and that cities can already adopt these measures locally.
Jim Guthrie — Says the state is forcing density on cities and suggests a new RS could be drafted instead.
Jim Guthrie — His argument is endorsed as the speaker agrees with him.
Jim Guthrie — Referenced as having mentioned a path forward.
Jim Guthrie — Commended for tackling the issue and spending time on it over the interim.
Jim Guthrie — Praised for working on the issue over the interim with other senators and stakeholders.
Jim Guthrie — Votes aye on the substitute motion to hold the bill in committee.
Jim Guthrie — Introduced the next question for the sponsor.
Jim Guthrie — Asked whether the fee language means a 12-unit density would require 12 times the fees or the same fees as a single-family home.
Jim Guthrie — Asked whether the density requirement means 12 times the fees or the same fees as one home.
Jim Guthrie — Referenced as having raised a point about the bill's language.
Jim Guthrie — Referenced as having raised the issue of the bill's minimum lot size and density provisions.
Jim Guthrie — Moved to hold Senate Bill 1279 in committee and began speaking to the motion.
Jim Guthrie — Argued for a more methodical approach and said the bill should be held in committee.
Jim Guthrie — Voted aye on the motion.
Jim Guthrie — Senator Guthrie moved that Senate Bill 1280 be held in committee and later voted aye on the motion.
Jim Guthrie — Senator Jim Guthrie is identified as one of the senators asking the witness a question, and he is later addressed again as the discussion continues on the same exchange, including clarification of COLA mechanics.