Idaho House approves memorial and concurrent resolution pressing federal review of Lava Ridge wind project
February 21, 2025 | 2025 House Legislative Sessions, 2025 Legislative Sessions, Idaho
This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »
The Idaho House on Feb. 20 passed a House Joint Memorial and later a House Concurrent Resolution asking federal officials to reconsider the Lava Ridge wind project proposed on Bureau of Land Management (BLM) lands in the Magic Valley.
Representatives moved the memorial, House Joint Memorial 5, to the top of the third-reading calendar and the chamber approved it by voice vote. Lawmakers then considered House Concurrent Resolution 8 and approved it by roll call, with the clerk recording 68 ayes and 2 members absent, the House clerk announced.
Supporters said the resolutions formalize opposition from local officials and residents and press the president and Congress to act. Representative (District 25) said the project—originally proposed at about 400 turbines and subsequently reduced in the BLM approval to roughly 231 turbines—still would require extensive roads and other infrastructure and would have a substantial local footprint. He said a recent change in the federal administration prompted a 90-day federal review order and that state leaders, including Governor Brad Little and the attorney general’s office, have engaged on the matter.
Representative (District 26) said local elected officials, county commissioners and residents in his district opposed the project and expressed concern about impacts on the aquifer. Representative (District 11) read a California Independent System Operator statement noting plans for transmission that could deliver Idaho wind energy to California and other markets—remarks supporters used to emphasize that the energy generated would largely flow out of state.
Lawmakers said the resolutions are intended as statements to federal authorities rather than to change state law. The joint memorial was described on the House floor as a letter to the president and Congress asking them to move to halt or repeal the project approval; the concurrent resolution was described as a formal legislative statement of the legislature’s opposition to the project.
The motions to place the measures on the calendar and to pass them drew brief floor debate and expressions of support from lawmakers representing districts near the project area and from others who said they stand with affected constituents. Some members noted past unanimous legislative opposition to use of federal lands for the project and emphasized protection of drinking water and local communities.
Both measures will be transmitted to the Senate for consideration.
Representatives moved the memorial, House Joint Memorial 5, to the top of the third-reading calendar and the chamber approved it by voice vote. Lawmakers then considered House Concurrent Resolution 8 and approved it by roll call, with the clerk recording 68 ayes and 2 members absent, the House clerk announced.
Supporters said the resolutions formalize opposition from local officials and residents and press the president and Congress to act. Representative (District 25) said the project—originally proposed at about 400 turbines and subsequently reduced in the BLM approval to roughly 231 turbines—still would require extensive roads and other infrastructure and would have a substantial local footprint. He said a recent change in the federal administration prompted a 90-day federal review order and that state leaders, including Governor Brad Little and the attorney general’s office, have engaged on the matter.
Representative (District 26) said local elected officials, county commissioners and residents in his district opposed the project and expressed concern about impacts on the aquifer. Representative (District 11) read a California Independent System Operator statement noting plans for transmission that could deliver Idaho wind energy to California and other markets—remarks supporters used to emphasize that the energy generated would largely flow out of state.
Lawmakers said the resolutions are intended as statements to federal authorities rather than to change state law. The joint memorial was described on the House floor as a letter to the president and Congress asking them to move to halt or repeal the project approval; the concurrent resolution was described as a formal legislative statement of the legislature’s opposition to the project.
The motions to place the measures on the calendar and to pass them drew brief floor debate and expressions of support from lawmakers representing districts near the project area and from others who said they stand with affected constituents. Some members noted past unanimous legislative opposition to use of federal lands for the project and emphasized protection of drinking water and local communities.
Both measures will be transmitted to the Senate for consideration.
View full meeting
This article is based on a recent meeting—watch the full video and explore the complete transcript for deeper insights into the discussion.
View full meeting