In 2015, the Idaho Urban Renewal Law of 1965 will be fifty years old. In those fifty years, at least seventy-three urban renewal districts in twenty-five of Idaho's forty-four counties have sprung up across the state of Idaho. In spite of urban renewal's longevity and proliferation in Idaho, it continues to face opposition in the state. Yet, when compared to other states, Idaho's urban renewal laws have always been fairly restrictive of the practice. Furthermore, in the fifty years since its inception, the Idaho legislature has changed and, arguably, improved the way that urban renewal is implemented in the state. Despite these improvements, the implementation of Idaho's urban renewal laws could benefit from minor changes.Part I of this article explains what urban renewal is, examines its history, posits that aversion to urban renewal is partly due to a turbulent history that misbranded it, describes what tax increment financing (TIF) is, and explains how TIF became an integral part of urban renewal. Part II examines the legality of urban renewal and TIF in Idaho, demonstrates how the Idaho Supreme Court has ruled on most of the major legal objections to urban renewal, and predicts how that court would decide unaddressed legal issues relating to urban renewal in Idaho. Part III explains that TIF is simultaneously successful and controversial because of inherent aspects of TIF that closely map features of contemporary local government, surveys TIF successes and failures in Idaho, shows the conservative beginnings of Idaho's TIF laws, displays how those laws have evolved to create more government accountability for TIF projects, and suggests minor changes that could improve TIF in Idaho. After the conclusion in part IV, a table in part V tracks the history and evolution of Idaho's urban renewal and TIF statutes.