Bonner County commissioners decline to advance water-ski observer change, seek marine-division review

Bonner County commissioners voted not to advance a proposed ordinance change on June 16 that would have amended county water-ski observer requirements to reflect a 2026 change in state law.

The proposed ordinance would have amended Bonner County Code section 3-1-112(k) to adopt exemptions allowed under Idaho Code 60-77-24 — including allowing vessels equipped with mirrors to tow skiers and permitting exemptions for regulated slalom courses and specified time windows. The chair read the ordinance aloud and a commissioner moved to waive three readings and advance the measure for discussion.

Rob Harrison, a Bonner County resident and member of a nonprofit water-ski club, told the board the club sought alignment with the new state law after the Legislature and governor acted on House Bill 887. Harrison said the club had long worked under a permit process, carried a $1,000,000 liability policy as part of that permit, and that early-morning skiing often makes finding a third observer difficult. “It sure would be nice to just go ski early in the morning,” Harrison said, arguing the change would not create a practical safety issue during low-use hours.

Sheriff Derrell Wheeler asked the board to delay any action so the sheriff’s marine division could review enforcement and public-education needs. “We’re the ones that have to enforce this ordinance,” Wheeler said, urging the board to give the marine division and legal staff time to weigh in and suggesting the county pause because the state change does not take effect locally until July 1.

Commissioners and staff debated enforcement capacity, liability exposure and whether the county must or may opt not to take the state exemption. County legal counsel explained that counties can adopt more stringent local rules if they do not conflict with state law, but noted the exemption in state statute allows, rather than requires, counties to change local code. Risk reviewer Christian Jocelyn recommended seeking marine-patrol expertise for public-safety assessment; Jocelyn said his review focused on insurance and internal compliance and that marine staff would have better subject-matter insight.

After deliberation, the board took a roll-call vote to advance the ordinance; two commissioners voted no and one voted yes. The presiding officer announced the motion did not pass. A commissioner asked that the item be placed back on the agenda for the next Tuesday meeting after the marine division and risk staff provide additional feedback; the chair agreed to return it next week.

The board did not adopt any ordinance at the June 16 meeting, and no changes to county code took effect. The county’s legal and risk staff and the sheriff’s marine division are now expected to review enforcement procedures, public-education needs and liability considerations before the board revisits the proposed amendment.