JFAC reverses course on wildfire funding

BOISE — The Joint Finance-Appropriations Committee voted to fund Idaho fire preparedness measures for the coming fire season Monday in what was a reversal of decisions made last week to vote down fire preparedness requests.

The Idaho Department of Lands' request for this fiscal year was to restore $124,900 of the department’s Forest and Range Fire Protection Program. This amount — similar to a request brought forward Wednesday — mostly restores the $131,800 the Joint Finance-Appropriations Committee (JFAC) previously approved as part of additional 1% cuts to the agency.

In his debate against the restoration, Rep. James Petzke, R-Meridian, pointed to the department’s expenditures during the previous fiscal year, in which the department ended up reverting some funding for its Forest and Range Fire Protection Program after not being fully expended by the end of the season.

He asserted IDL could instead pull from two dedicated funds outside of its fire suppression efficiency fund for these aims: a forest protection fund as well as a wildland equipment replacement fund.

IDL Director Dustin Miller responded, in both cases, that using these funds for fire prevention “would not be an appropriate use of this funding.” Miller said the forest protection fund relates to enforcing the Idaho Forest Practices Act through standards around timber harvesting, planting trees and other forms of forest management. 

As for the equipment replacement fund, this comes from reimbursements the department receives for sending its resources outside of its jurisdiction. These funds then get funneled back into purchasing engines, command vehicles and similar equipment Miller said, adding not only is the fund reserved for equipment, it also “is not fully keeping up with our demands either,” Miller said.

As for what the funds will go toward, Miller said the intention is to bolster personnel at the Twin Falls-based Eastern Idaho Forest Protective District as the department took on additional acreage in the eastern part of the state that will bring additional fire concerns. “We have between 12 and 15 seasonal firefighters that we would like to bring on,” Miller said, “but we're kind of in this holding pattern — given the uncertainty with this funding right now — to stand up that district.” 

If these firefighters aren't available to the department in the summer, the result will be the state of Idaho increasing reliance on the federal government to help fight fires in the state, Miller said.

Little further debate came after this statement from Miller, and the committee voted to restore $124,900 in fire preparedness funding for this fiscal year in a 14-4 vote. 

Though this request passed on the first go-around Monday, the same could not be said for the fiscal year 2027 request to cover the second half of this year’s fire season. In this request, IDL sought to restore $140,400 of a $318,300 reduction to the Forest and Range Fire Protection Program.

The subsequent year’s request initially failed in a 13-5 vote. Though the majority of the committee voted in favor, the motion failed to get approval from the majority of House members on the committee.

After further consideration, Rep. Chris Bruce, R-Kuna, who first voted against funding for the next fiscal year, motioned for the body to reconsider the vote. Bruce said his desire to change his vote stemmed from confusion on what funds could or could not be used by the department for fire prevention.

Committee co-chair Rep. Josh Tanner, R-Eagle, said a two-thirds vote was needed to do so and the committee voted 13-5. Though this was over two-thirds of the body, Tanner said two-thirds of both Senate and House committee members were needed to pass. 

After clarification was made that reconsideration rules require a simple majority, the funding request was brought back before the committee by Bruce. Though the end tally of 13-5 was the same, this time the vote received majorities of both House and Senate members after Bruce changed to a vote in favor.

With both funding requests approved, they will now head to the legislature for a wider vote.

Future firefighting bonuses 

Separate from IDL funding requests, JFAC also passed new restrictions around how future firefighter bonuses are delivered in the state, following some on-the-fly revisions.

An initial proposal from Petzke sought to make future firefighter bonuses limited to “temporary returning seasonal firefighters and temporary first-year seasonal firefighters.” The request came shortly after he took exception with the $1 million fire bonus the Idaho Legislature and Gov. Brad Little approved last year not exclusively being distributed to front-line firefighters.

That one-time bonus, however, explicitly allowed for “wildland firefighters and other critical support staff” to be eligible for the distribution, as was noted by Miller at a previous meeting. Miller said even though this bonus went to “primary” firefighters, there was still a desire within the department to recognize and incentivize those who maintained qualifications to assist with firefighters during the fire season.

Sen. Jim Woodward, R-Sagle, questioned whether it was the intention to preclude full-time IDL employees — many of whom shift to assist firefighting efforts during the summer months — from these firefighting bonuses.

“Bonuses are for firefighters, those who are standing next to a fire,” Woodward said. “Whether they’re a full-time IDL employee or a seasonal … if they’re a firefighter standing next to a fire, (there’s) potential to get burned or killed.”

Woodward’s remarks prompted Petzke to reconsider the restriction to allow for bonuses to be applied so long as an individual has an “incident qualification card including an operational qualification.” These cards, often referred to as “red cards,” certify an individual has the training, experience and fitness level necessary to assist with wildland fire incidents.

A subsequent motion from Petzke with this less-restrictive language passed the committee with unanimous consent. It remains to be seen exactly how or when this will carry out in practice, as Little has not included firefighting bonuses in the budget recommendations he delivered at the onset of the legislative session.