What did Idaho's AG say about a 2003 ballot initiative to allow Idaho's 'resort counties' to impose a local sales tax for property tax relief?
Plain-English summary
This is the AG's review (under Idaho Code § 34-1809) of a ballot initiative filed February 12, 2003, titled the "Resort County Sales Tax." It would have permitted resort counties to impose a countywide sales tax, with a portion of revenue used for local property tax relief.
The initiative's context: in Concerned Citizens of Kootenai County v. Kootenai County, 137 Idaho 496 (2002), the Idaho Supreme Court struck down the entire Resort County Act because the definition of "resort county" was drawn so narrowly that it applied only to Kootenai County. That made the Act a local or special law in violation of Idaho Const. art. III, § 19.
The 2003 initiative tried to fix that defect by adopting a definition of "resort county" modeled on Idaho's existing City Property Tax Alternatives Act of 1978 (Idaho Code §§ 50-1043 to 50-1049, which permits certain resort cities to impose a local sales tax). The new definition required:
1. A county population over 17,000;
2. The county must "derive a major portion of its economic well-being from businesses catering to recreational needs and meeting needs of people traveling to that destination county for an extended period of time."
The AG concluded this definition was "sufficiently inclusive to avoid the flaw of being a local or special law." Blaine County (Sun Valley area), for example, met the population threshold and the tourism-economy criterion. Other Idaho counties might also qualify depending on their circumstances.
The certificate then walked through the proposal's other operational features. The AG did not raise other significant constitutional concerns about the proposed initiative.
Currency note
This opinion was issued in 2003. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.
The local-or-special-law analysis under Idaho Const. art. III, § 19 reflects long-standing Idaho doctrine. Idaho's local option sales tax framework for resort cities and counties has been amended since 2003. Anyone analyzing current local-option taxation should consult current Idaho Code Title 50, Chapter 10 and related provisions.
Common questions
Q: Did this initiative make the ballot?
A: This certificate addressed only the legal form of the proposal. The petition's success at the ballot is a separate question.
Q: What is the 'local or special law' rule?
A: Idaho Const. art. III, § 19 prohibits the Legislature (or initiatives) from passing local or special laws on certain enumerated subjects. A law is local if it applies to a specific locality rather than equally to all areas; it is special if it singles out a class without rational basis. The cure is to write a generally applicable law that captures the relevant features without naming particular places.
Q: How is this different from the City Property Tax Alternatives Act?
A: The City Property Tax Alternatives Act (Idaho Code §§ 50-1043 to 50-1049, enacted 1978) lets resort cities (Sun Valley, McCall, Stanley, Ketchum, etc.) impose a local sales tax. The 2003 initiative would have extended a similar tool to resort counties. Both aim to let tourism-dependent jurisdictions capture revenue from visitors.
Q: Why does Blaine County qualify?
A: Blaine County (which includes Sun Valley, Ketchum, and Hailey) had a population over 17,000 in 2003 and a tourism-dependent economy, so it met both prongs of the proposed definition.
Background and statutory framework
Idaho's local option sales tax framework allows certain qualifying jurisdictions to impose local sales taxes on top of the state sales tax. The City Property Tax Alternatives Act of 1978 (Idaho Code §§ 50-1043 to 50-1049) was the earliest of these. The Resort County Act (struck down in 2002) was a similar attempt at the county level. The 2003 initiative was an effort to revive the county-level local option after the 2002 invalidation.
Citations and references
Statutes and constitutional provisions:
- Idaho Code § 34-1809
- Idaho Code §§ 50-1043 to 50-1049 (City Property Tax Alternatives Act)
- Idaho Const. art. III, § 19 (no local or special laws)
Case:
- Concerned Citizens of Kootenai County v. Kootenai County, 137 Idaho 496 (2002)
Source
- Landing page: https://www.ag.idaho.gov/office-resources/opinions/
- Original PDF: https://ag.idaho.gov/content/uploads/2018/04/C031103.pdf
Original opinion text
March 11, 2003
The Honorable Ben Ysursa
Secretary of State
HAND DELIVERED
Re: Certificate of Review – Initiative Regarding the Resort County Sales Tax
Dear Mr. Ysursa:
An initiative petition was filed with your office on February 12, 2003. Pursuant to Idaho Code § 34-1809, this office has reviewed the petition and has prepared the following advisory comments. I stress that, given the strict statutory time frame in which this office must respond, and the complexity of the issues raised in this petition, this review can only isolate areas of concern and cannot provide an in-depth analysis of each issue that may present problems. Further, under the review statute, the Attorney General's recommendations are "advisory only," and the petitioners are free to "accept or reject them in whole or in part."
[The full certificate runs several pages with sections on Ballot Title; Matters of Substantive Import (analysis of the new "resort county" definition; comparison to Concerned Citizens of Kootenai County; review of the initiative's other operational features); and Conclusion. See the linked PDF for the complete text.]
Sincerely,
LAWRENCE G. WASDEN
Attorney General