Idaho HB 963 would have converted HOAs into common-property-only entities — it died in six days
Idaho HB 963 would have converted HOAs into common-property-only entities — it died in six days
2026-09-07 · Idaho · Legislation · Did not pass
What happened. House Bill 963 was introduced on 27 March 2026, six days before the Idaho Legislature adjourned sine die on 2 April. It was reported printed and referred to the Ways and Means Committee, and no further action was recorded. It died in committee without a hearing.1
The timing tells you it was never going to pass this session. The content tells you what a serious attempt at Idaho HOA reform might look like, because HB 963 is the most detailed community-association bill Idaho has produced — and roughly half of it is governance housekeeping that no one opposed.
Part one: a rewrite of the administration statute
Section 1 would have substantially rebuilt Idaho Code § 55-3204. The additions:2
- A quorum, at last. A new subsection (4) would have set a quorum of ten percent (10%) of the votes entitled to be cast, represented in person, by proxy, by mailed written ballot, by absentee ballot, or by remote communication as authorised by the board. Idaho's HOA Act currently sets no quorum at all.
- A mandatory annual meeting of the membership each calendar year, in person or — with the approval of a simple majority of members — electronic or hybrid.
- Notice governed by Idaho Code §§ 30-30-501 and 30-30-505, with an opt-in electronic notice process on identical dates and information.
- Minutes of every meeting, membership and board alike, preserved for at least ten years.
- Assessment authority set by the governing documents, or, where the documents are silent, by majority approval of the members.
The bill also carried forward and renumbered existing protections: open board meetings, the enumerated executive-session purposes, annual conflict-of-interest and familial-relationship declarations by directors, the bar on using rulemaking power over common property to expand restrictive covenants as they apply to a member's property, and the prevailing-member attorney-fee award for chapter violations.
Part two: automatic conversion
Section 2 would have added § 55-3204C. Any association ten years old or more as of 1 January 2027 would automatically convert to a “joint ownership association” on 1 January 2030 unless its members voted against conversion; younger and future associations would convert ten years after incorporation or bylaw adoption, then every ten years after any successful vote against.
The voting threshold differed from its predecessor bill's. Conversion would not occur “if a quorum is present and a majority of the votes represented and voting vote against such conversion” — a majority of those voting at a quorate meeting, rather than HB 708's majority of all eligible voters.
What a joint ownership association could and could not do
Section 3 would have added § 55-3214 defining the successor entity. A joint ownership association means an incorporated or unincorporated residential association in which membership is based on owning or possessing an interest in real property, and which owns common property with authority to preserve, maintain, repair and manage it. Common property expressly includes private roads, parks, open spaces, recreational facilities and water rights.
Its powers would have been three, and only three:
- levy assessments against lots for the actual and reasonable costs incurred in maintaining and managing common property;
- obtain insurance for common property; and
- enter contracts necessary for maintaining and managing common property.
And the limits were categorical: a joint ownership association “shall not have the authority to adopt or enforce any rules regulating conduct that is not directly related to common property,” and “shall not have the authority to regulate aesthetic standards, land use restrictions beyond those imposed by law, or private covenants unrelated to common property.”
The bill would also have permitted a new subdivision to form a joint ownership association from inception, in lieu of a homeowner's association.
The provision that would have done the most work
Subsection (3) of the conversion section is where the covenants go. On conversion, the vote would constitute authorisation to amend or terminate the existing governing documents, form the new entity, and transfer common property and assets to it — and then:
- H.B. 963 (2026), proposed Idaho Code § 55-3204C(3)[A]ll covenants, conditions, and restrictions granting the association authority to regulate anything other than preserving, maintaining, repairing, and managing common property shall be terminated. All terms necessary to preserving common easements, maintenance obligations, or other related items shall remain in effect unless expressly amended.
That is the substance of the proposal. Architectural control, use restrictions, exterior standards, parking rules, pet limits, rental provisions — anything not tied to common property — would terminate by operation of statute upon a conversion that occurred by default if members failed to stop it.
Everything else in the bill is procedure. This sentence is the policy.
Why the details matter even though it failed
Two reasons.
First, the governance half is separable and largely uncontroversial. A 10% quorum, a mandatory annual meeting, ten-year minute retention and a statutory notice standard are the kind of provisions that pass on their own in other states, and Idaho's HOA Act — a narrow, piecemeal chapter — currently lacks all of them. A 2027 bill that carried section 1 without sections 2 and 3 would be a very different proposition.
Second, the industry position on record is not uniform opposition. The Community Associations Institute's Idaho legislative action committee reports that its members testified on the bill and that the testimony produced favourable amendment language before it stalled.3
What it means for boards
- Check whether you could pass a quorum. Under HB 963, ten percent would have been enough to hold a meeting — and a quorate meeting was what stood between an association and automatic conversion. Associations that cannot reach even that are the ones most exposed to any default-rule bill.
- Retain minutes properly now. Ten years is not an unusual standard and Idaho may adopt it. Reconstructing a decade of minutes after the fact is not possible.
- Know which of your covenants relate to common property. Under this bill that line determined what survived. It is a useful audit regardless.
- Watch § 55-3204, not just the headline sections. The administration statute is where Idaho's HOA law has actually been changing, and it is where a 2027 bill is most likely to land.
What to watch next
HB 963 and HB 708 were both associated with Rep. Jeff Ehlers, R-Meridian, and both died in committee in 2026. Idaho bills do not carry over, so any successor starts fresh in the session convening January 2027. As of now no interim legislative committee is studying housing or community-association law, so a 2027 bill would arrive from an individual legislator rather than from a committee recommendation.4
Related Idaho HOA Topics
- H.B. 963, 2026 Reg. Sess. — bill status showing introduction 27 March and referral to Ways and Means ↩
- H.B. 963 as introduced — full text amending § 55-3204 and adding §§ 55-3204C and 55-3214 ↩
- Community Associations Institute, Idaho 2026 legislative session report ↩
- Idaho Legislature, 2026 interim committees (no housing or community-association study committee listed) ↩
Stay on top of Idaho HOA law
Every week: new Idaho legislation, court rulings, and regulatory developments affecting condos, planned communities, and property managers. Free.
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.