Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Facility Relocation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lawmakers question $9.6M ITD plan to relocate District 4 headquarters from Shoshone to Twin Falls
Summary
Senators pressed Idaho Transportation Department Director Scott Stokes over a renewed request to relocate District 4 from Shoshone to Twin Falls, questioning the $9.6 million price and whether the move is necessary after recent assessments and maintenance plans.
During the Joint Finance-Appropriations Committee hearing, lawmakers confronted ITD leadership over a repeated request to relocate District 4 headquarters from Shoshone to Twin Falls and to fund a new building.
"For $9,600,000 I think you could have public meetings at the courthouse in Twin Falls or at the library," Senator Cook said, noting that last year's working group and the governor rejected the relocation. "The JFAC budget working group, the JFAC committee, the Idaho House of Representatives, the Idaho Senate, and governor Brad Little all voted to reject the relocation of District 4 from Shoshone to Twin Falls."
Cook told the committee he had toured the Shoshone campus and observed only maintenance needs, and presented commute‑time analysis showing modest differences: "The difference between the median one way commute time to the current headquarters and the proposed location in Twin Falls is 12 minutes." He questioned whether that difference justified nearly $10 million in relocation costs.
Director Scott Stokes replied that the Transportation Board and department staff recommended reassessing the long‑term delivery location for District 4 so services would be closer to a growing population center. "We do have our recommendation and where we would like to serve the public," Stokes said. He also described employee considerations about where to store equipment and the need for long‑term operational efficiency.
Committee members pressed for detail on the cost estimates. Stokes described the funding breakout when asked: "8,000,000 was for access and site development, 1.6 is for the design, with variability in building costs." Representative Price asked whether funds previously earmarked for Shoshone maintenance had been spent; Stokes said work is underway: "The repair will consist primarily of replacing the roofing materials and windows... It'll be installed this summer."
Why it matters: The request revisits a question the Legislature and governor declined last year, and it raises typical budget tradeoffs between capital investments and targeted maintenance. Lawmakers asked whether modest commute‑time savings and future public access justify construction costs that could be allocated elsewhere.
Ending: Committee members indicated skepticism and asked the department to provide further justification; no decision was made during the hearing.
