The Buhl Lantern

05/01/2026

BUHL LANTERN | COMMUNITY UPDATE
Trailer & RV Parking Ordinance Discussion – Summary & Next Steps

At the most recent Buhl City Council meeting, discussion continued regarding potential changes to the city’s trailer and RV parking ordinance. This topic has generated notable community interest due to its impact on residents, particularly those who rely on trailers for work or travel.

Here’s a summary of key points from the discussion:

• A citizen petition, now at 216 signatures and growing, has been submitted to the council. The petition specifically requests a 72-hour allowance for RVs and enclosed trailers, rather than a general or open-ended variance.

• During the meeting, a 12-hour variance was discussed as a potential option. Questions were raised about how this timeframe would function in everyday situations, including standard overnight parking.

• A 48-hour allowance has also been part of the broader conversation. Some residents have noted that this may still fall short of accommodating common use cases, such as weekend parking.

• Buhl Police Chief indicated that a 72-hour allowance could present enforcement challenges, though specific enforcement methods were not fully outlined during the discussion.

• Alternative enforcement approaches such as time-stamped photo documentation or license plate tracking, have been referenced in other jurisdictions as potential tools, though these were not formally proposed or adopted at this stage.

• Councilwoman Sisson noted during the meeting that while she may have had personal preferences, she recognized the importance of representing the will of the community.

This remains an active discussion, and no final determination has been made.

For those who would like to review the full context, a link to the meeting is included below.

We encourage residents to stay informed and participate in the process—whether by attending meetings, submitting written comments, or speaking during public comment periods.

Full meeting link: https://www.youtube.com/live/inyPMxR58no?si=IhzbQM8Crs2yNlMV

A citizen letter submitted after the meeting will be shared in the comments for additional perspective.

1 like. "City Council - Working Session - April 27, 2026"

04/27/2026

City Council meeting tonight at 6:30 PM!

Here's an open letter to the city council and all Buhl citizens:

Dear Buhl Mayor and City Council Members,

I have been working on iterations of this letter for some time. Please forgive its length. First, I want to thank each of you for your time, your service, and your willingness to sit
through difficult conversations on behalf of this community. I know local government is often thankless, and I recognize that every person on this council is being asked to weigh
competing concerns from residents who care deeply about Buhl.

I want to begin by addressing Council President Marla Sission directly and respectfully. Marla, I listened to and then obtained and read your statement at the April 13 meeting on the parking ordinance carefully. You wrote that,

“With every discussion we have had, I have
said that public safety is my number one concern.
” You also spoke about children riding bikes or walking to school, emergency medical response, and fire access. As a father of
five, I not only understand that concern, I share it. I appreciate your heart on that issue. I believe your concern for safety is sincere, and I do not want that point lost in this discussion.
Children should be safe. Emergency vehicles should have access. Visibility should matter.

Those are not controversial principles.
Where I strongly disagree is not with the goal of safety, but with the assumption that the current ordinance, as written and enforced, is the right way to accomplish it. I believe the
ordinance has created a serious disconnect between the city’s stated intent and the practical reality of Buhl’s working-class residents.

Buhl is not a subdivision full of oversized
driveways and HOA-style street design. Buhl is an older, working town. Many homes here are more than one hundred years old. Mine was built in 1912 and has no driveway. That is not a personal inconvenience I created. That is the reality of the housing stock in this town.

I am a small business owner, a licensed plumbing contractor. My truck and trailer are not toys, clutter, or cosmetic nuisances. They are the tools I use to feed my family and serve
customers in this community. My truck also serves as a family vehicle when needed, because like many working families, I cannot afford a separate work truck, family vehicle,
and storage arrangement just to satisfy an ordinance that does not reflect how people here actually live. For many of us, a trailer is not a luxury. It is the compromise that makes work,
family, and survival possible.

My own interaction with code enforcement made the problem painfully clear. I was working on 9th Street, one of the wider streets in Buhl. I was parked between two driveways, more
than a hundred feet from an intersection, and I was not blocking traffic, a sidewalk, a driveway, or emergency access. I was actively working out of my trailer, going back and
forth as needed for tools and parts while serving a home that did not have a driveway.

I was still told that this did not count as “actively loading or unloading” and that I could be cited.

To be clear, Candace was professional, kind, patient, and committed to doing the job she has been given. My criticism is not personal toward her. In fact, she was the one who
encouraged me to bring this issue to council. But the options I was given show exactly how unrealistic the ordinance is.

I was told I could park in a neighbor’s driveway with permission,
even though that depends on a neighbor having available space and being willing. I could park on the egress of the home I was serving, so long as I did not block the sidewalk, even
though that is not always physically possible. I could park in the alley, if there was room and if I did not block the alley, which again is often impossible and highly situational. I could
leave the trailer at my own home, off street, and drive back and forth for parts, even though my own home has no driveway. Or I could park at Valley Wide in Buhl and drive back and forth from there while trying to complete a job.

That is not a workable ordinance. That is a maze of impractical suggestions that may look acceptable on paper but collapse immediately in real life. I was also told during my initial interaction with Candace that there may be permit exemptions. As a licensed contractor who deals with permits regularly, I asked what permit
would apply. Candace could not specify one. According to the provisions outlined by the Idaho Department of Occupational and Professional Licensing, the scope of work at the job I was engaged in when I mentioned Candace, I did not require a permit.

So I asked whether the city was suggesting that I pull state permits for work that does not legally require them
simply to avoid a city trailer citation. At that point, I was told to bring the issue to city council.

So here I am.

That brings me to former councilman Kelly Peterson’s statement during the April 13 meeting. During the public comment section of the meeting, he said, “People are traveling 26 [in a 25] don’t normally get a ticket,” and went on to say,“ They don’t absolutely have to enforce that law to the letter,” because it can be handled with officer discretion.

I reject that reasoning completely. Laws should be written to clearly define and protect the rights of citizens, not to broadly restrict them and then depend on discretion to soften the
impact. Equal application of the law is a foundational principle of our constitution, not an optional one.

Our freedoms should not depend on whether an enforcing agent feels generous that day.

Our ability to work, serve customers, use our homes, and live normal lives should not rest on subjective interpretation. If a law must be softened through selective enforcement in
order to avoid absurd outcomes, then the law itself is poorly written. That is not fairness. That is arbitrary government. It is a slippery and ignorant slope to tell citizens, in effect,
“Yes, the law technically says this, but don’t worry, maybe it won’t be enforced against you.”

That is not how rights are protected. That is how unequal enforcement begins.

The law should be clear enough, fair enough, and grounded enough that ordinary citizens can read it and know where they stand. It should not require tradespeople, homeowners, or
families to gamble on discretion.

I also want to address former Mayor Pamela McClain’s submitted letter from the April 13 meeting. In that letter, Mrs. McClain wrote that the “primary concerns appear to come from
individuals who may be monetarily impacted,” and cautioned the council not to view “the most vocal opposition as representative of the broader population of our community.”

That framing is fundamentally flawed. Reducing the concerns of over 200 signed residents to being merely “monetarily impacted” ignores the actual substance of what is being raised.

These are not complaints about preference or convenience, they are statements about the ability to work, to access homes, to complete jobs, and to function within the physical constraints of this town.

When a contractor cannot park near a jobsite, when a homeowner has no lawful place to load a trailer at their own residence, and when ordinary, necessary activity results in
repeated citations, that is not a minor financial inconvenience. It is a structural problem with how the ordinance operates in practice.

To characterize those realities as simply monetary concerns does not accurately represent the issue—it diminishes it. That statement is not only dismissive, it is contradicted by the
response from the community. This petition has gathered 209 signatures in support of changing the ordinance to allow reasonable trailer use.

These are not anonymous complaints. These are your constituents.

For the sake of readability in a public, I am abbreviating last names below, but I am happy to provide the full petition with full names and signatures to the council upon request.

One signer wrote,
“This ordinance effectively prohibits me from serving my customers —and even from parking at my own home.”
— J. D.

Another stated,
“Enforcement of the current law seems arbitrary and overbearing
considering the make-up of our small, working class, rural community.”
— M. D.

A contractor asked plainly,
“How are we supposed to complete our work without incurring
fines?” — B. H.

A property owner wrote,
“Contractors and service providers are not a nuisance—they are an essential part of keeping our community livable and our economy functioning.” - C.R

Another resident shared,
“This has made us want to move more than ever.”
— K. W.

Others echoed the same reality in different words.
“There needs to be allowances for workers in our town to be able to operate out of trailers parked on the street.”
— T. G.

“The current code is not realistic for the daily activities happening within the city.”
— M. R.

“I believe it is most important to keep the people of Buhl in mind when making regulations…the ordinance does not consider normal daily activities or local housing construction.”
— K.K.

One family described being woken at 7 a.m. on Easter morning to move a trailer after arriving home at midnight — C. B.

Another resident wrote,
“There has to be some common sense to parking when it’s for short periods of time.”
— M. W.

These are not extreme positions. These are ordinary people describing ordinary situations.

The petition itself states clearly that the current ordinance “does not reflect the practical realities or needs of our community,” especially given the age of housing and lack of off-street parking. It outlines a reasonable solution: a seventy-two-hour allowance, a
tradespeople exemption, and no additional permits or fees. It also correctly points out that Buhl already enforces common-sense safety protections—no blocking sidewalks, driveways, intersections, or alleys.

Mayor Doug Howarth has proposed a more balanced version of the ordinance, and I want to recognize that effort. It reflects a willingness to actually solve the problem rather than
dismiss it.

Because the question in front of you is simple. Does this ordinance, as written and enforced, actually work for Buhl?
Not for an idealized version of Buhl. For the real one.

A letter submitted by Allyn and Candy Reynolds at the April 13th meeting argues that the ordinance improves “appearance and pride” and creates a more polished streetscape. I understand that perspective. But appearance cannot outweigh function. A cleaner-looking street is not more important than a contractor being able to serve a customer, or a family being able to load a trailer, or a resident with no driveway being able to live within the law.

Council President Sission noted that loading and unloading is already allowed. In practice, that is not functioning as a meaningful exemption. Working out of a trailer, retrieving tools,
and performing a job did not qualify. That means the ordinance, as applied, is not aligned with its intent.

I am asking this council to fix that.
Adopt a seventy-two-hour allowance. Create a clear exemption for tradespeople. Remove reliance on subjective enforcement and replace it with clear, fair standards. Continue
enforcing real safety violations, but stop treating normal, responsible use as if it is a hazard.

This is not about weakening standards. It is about making them accurate.

Finally, I respectfully request that an abbreviated version of this letter be read aloud during the next available public
comment. I request a copy of the longer version (you have received the original via email) be included or attached to the minutes and entered into the official record, as it reflects not only my position, but the concerns of over 200 citizens who have signed in support of a reasonable amendment.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Joshua Dowding
Owner, Doulos Plumbing

Send a message to learn more

04/17/2026

Great question, we're on it.

The main Idaho resource is the Idaho Open Meeting Law, Idaho Code §§ 74-201 through 74-208, plus the Idaho Attorney General’s Open Meeting Law Manual, which explains the statute in plain language. 

https://www.ag.idaho.gov/content/uploads/2025/08/OpenMeeting.pdf

For city council meetings, the most important parts are these:

Idaho starts with a strong policy statement: “the formation of public policy is public business and shall not be conducted in secret.” The Idaho Supreme Court recently emphasized that this is the starting point for interpreting the law. 

Under Idaho Code § 74-203, meetings of a governing body are generally required to be open to the public, and secret-ballot decision-making is not allowed. The Attorney General’s manual also explains that a “meeting” includes not just a final vote, but deliberating toward a decision when a quorum is present. 

For notice and agendas, the basic rule is:

• regular meetings: at least 5 calendar days’ meeting notice and 48 hours’ agenda notice;
• special meetings or executive-session-only meetings: at least 24 hours’ notice and agenda, unless there is a statutory emergency.

If the agency has a website or social media presence, the notice and agenda must also be posted electronically. Agenda items that may be voted on should be marked as action items. 

For agenda changes, Idaho allows amendments, but there are rules. If an item is added late, the governing body must state the good-faith reason it was not on the original agenda, vote to amend the agenda, and record that in the minutes. After the meeting has started, final action generally cannot be taken on a newly added item unless an emergency is declared, and that emergency justification must be reflected in the minutes. 

For executive session (closed session), the exceptions are real but limited. Idaho courts and the Attorney General both say the exceptions to open meetings must be narrowly construed. Before going into executive session, the council must first be in a valid open meeting, the presiding officer must identify the specific statutory basis, and two-thirds of the governing body must vote in favor, with each member’s vote recorded in the minutes. Also, no final action or final decision may be made in executive session. 

For minutes, Idaho Code § 74-205 requires written minutes for all meetings. They must be available to the public within a reasonable time and include, at minimum, who was present, what motions or ordinances were proposed, and the results of votes. Executive-session minutes must still identify the statutory subsection authorizing the session and the general purpose/topic, without undermining the reason for confidentiality. 
For enforcement, Idaho Code § 74-208 matters a lot. If action, or the deliberation leading to that action, happens in violation of the Open Meeting Law, a court may declare that action null and void. Members of a governing body can also face civil penalties—up to $250 for a violation, up to $1,500 for a knowing violation, and more for certain repeat knowing violations. The law also allows a public agency a short chance to cure a violation after written notice by publicly acknowledging it and voiding the action within the statutory cure period. 

Here are the resources for review:

1. Idaho Code § 74-201 — policy behind the law. 
2. Idaho Code § 74-203 — meetings must be open. 
3. Idaho Code § 74-204 — notice and agenda rules. 
4. Idaho Code §§ 74-205, 74-206, 74-208 — minutes, executive sessions, and enforcement. 

A neutral practical takeaway for citizens is this: when reviewing a city council meeting, the first questions to ask are whether the meeting was properly noticed, whether the agenda clearly identified action items, whether any executive session cited the correct legal basis and two-thirds vote, and whether the minutes reflect what happened. Those are often the easiest first indicators of compliance or noncompliance under Idaho law. 

Keep the questions coming. An informed society is an involved society.

04/16/2026

One of our goals at The Buhl Lantern is to encourage citizens to exercise their constitutional right to engage in government. In order to do that you must first know how government was intended to work. It doesn't always function that way because citizens aren't involved.

I get it. I'm often overwhelmed and too busy to pay attention to what's going on in city government, never mind state or national levels. But here's the thing: that's how they want us to be!

So here's our first installment:

How the United States Government Works: A Simple Guide from Washington, D.C., to Buhl, Idaho.

The U.S. government is like a layered cake—each level has its own job, but they all work together to serve the people.

This is by design. The Founding Fathers split power so no single person or group could take control. They created a federal system, meaning power is shared between the national government in Washington, D.C., state governments, and local governments down to the smallest town.

This setup, called federalism, divides responsibilities:

The federal government handles national issues like defense and currency.

States manage matters closer to home, like schools and highways.

Local governments take care of everyday needs like trash collection and parks.

At every level, power is divided into three branches—legislative, executive, and judicial—so they keep each other in check. It’s a system of checks and balances.

Here’s how it works, from the top down.

1. The Federal Government: The National Level

Located in Washington, D.C., the federal government only has the powers granted by the U.S. Constitution, such as declaring war, printing money, and regulating trade between states. All other powers belong to the states or the people. It has three equal branches:

Legislative Branch: (Congress) This is where laws are made. Congress is split into two bodies:

The Senate: 100 members (two from each state). Senators serve six-year terms and often focus on broader national issues.

The House of Representatives: 435 members, apportioned by state population. Representatives serve two-year terms and typically focus on issues affecting their districts.

A bill must pass both the House and the Senate before going to the president. This two-house design forces compromise.

Executive Branch: (The President and Administration) This branch enforces the laws. The president is elected every four years (maximum of two terms) and can sign or veto bills, command the military, make treaties (with Senate approval), and appoint judges and cabinet members. Under the president are executive departments (e.g., Defense, Education) and agencies that handle daily operations.

Judicial Branch (The Courts) This branch interprets the laws and determines their constitutionality. The highest court is the Supreme Court (nine justices appointed for life), supported by lower federal courts. Through judicial review, the courts can strike down laws or executive actions that violate the Constitution.

Checks and balances in action:

Congress can pass a law, but the president can veto it (Congress can override the veto with a two-thirds vote).
The president appoints judges, but the Senate must confirm them.

The Supreme Court can declare a law unconstitutional.

2. State Governments: A Mini-Federal System

Each of the 50 states has its own constitution and operates like a smaller version of the federal government. States hold all powers not expressly given to the federal government (per the 10th Amendment), including running public schools, issuing driver’s licenses, and handling most criminal and family law.
State structure mirrors the federal model:

Legislative Branch: Most states have a bicameral legislature (a senate and a house/assembly) that makes state laws and controls the budget.

Executive Branch: Headed by a governor (typically elected every four years) who enforces state laws, manages the budget, and can veto bills. States have their own departments (e.g., transportation, health).

Judicial Branch: State supreme courts and lower courts interpret state laws and can review them under the state constitution.
States and the federal government cooperate through grants (federal money for highways, disaster relief, etc.).

However, if state and federal law conflict, federal law prevails under the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause.

3. Local Governments: Where Everyday Decisions Happen

Local government is where the system touches your daily life. States create and control local governments, which is why rules can vary widely from one town to the next.

County (or Parish) Government States are divided into counties. In rural areas, the county is often the primary government. An elected board of commissioners acts as a mini-legislature, setting the budget, passing local ordinances, and overseeing:

Roads and bridges outside cities
Sheriff’s office and jails
Property taxes and land records
Public health and elections

In very rural communities, the county might be the only government you interact with.

Municipal Governments (Cities, Towns, Villages) If you live within city limits, you also have a city or town government. Most use a mayor-council system: an elected mayor (executive) and city council (legislative) make laws on zoning, parks, garbage collection, local police, and business permits. The City of Buhl has a municipal government.

Some small New England towns use a town meeting style, where citizens vote directly on the budget and local rules.

The Smallest Level: Special Districts and Rural Communities
School Districts: Separate elected boards run public schools, setting curriculum, hiring teachers, and managing local school taxes.

Special Districts: These handle single services like fire protection, water, sewage, or libraries, governed by small elected boards.

Unincorporated Rural Areas: In the countryside without a city or town, residents are governed directly by the county. Local government may consist of the county sheriff, a board of commissioners, and perhaps a township board.

Local governments are funded primarily by property taxes, sales taxes, and state/federal grants. They manage the services you notice daily: fixing potholes, running libraries, and approving new local businesses.

Why This Design Works (and Why It’s Complicated)

The system is built on a simple idea: keep power close to the people. You elect leaders at every level—from your member of Congress to your school board member. If you’re unhappy, you can vote them out or contact them directly (many local officials answer their own phones).

The design is intentionally messy. Passing a significant law often requires approval from multiple federal, state, and local bodies. This slows things down, preventing rash decisions but also demanding cooperation across levels to tackle big problems like disasters or infrastructure.

In a small town, your daily life is largely shaped by county commissioners and the school board. Yet those local decisions must still fit within the rules set by your state and the U.S. Constitution.

The system isn’t perfect—gridlock and intergovernmental disputes happen. But the Founders built it this way so “We the People” stay in charge. Understanding it is the first step to making it work for you. The next time you vote, pay taxes, or notice a pothole, you’re participating in the world’s longest-running experiment in self-government.

This is our governent: "Of the people, for the people, and by the people." Our Founding Fathers guaranteed us a voice!

The Buhl Lantern encourages you to use it!

04/15/2026

In less than 24 hours, the Buhl Lantern has grown to over 250 followers.

That tells us something important: people are paying attention, and more than that, people want to understand what’s actually happening in their community.

That’s the purpose of this page.

Our goal is to ask questions, track down answers, and lay them out clearly using public records, meeting minutes, administrative code, and the paper trails that decisions leave behind. The kind of information that already exists, but isn’t always easy to follow or access in one place.

We’re not here just to talk about ongoing projects, we’re here to help make sense of how decisions are made, who’s making them, and what they actually mean.

So we’ll ask directly:

What do you want to know?

Are there topics, decisions, or processes you’d like us to dig into? Areas where things haven’t added up, or where you feel like you’re missing the full picture?

If it can be found, documented, and verified, we’ll work to bring it forward.

Because a community that understands what’s happening is a community that can actually participate in it.

04/14/2026

“Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants; electric light the most efficient policeman.” — Louis Brandeis

Welcome to The Buhl Lantern.

The name was chosen intentionally. A lantern doesn’t create what’s there, it reveals it. It brings light to things that might otherwise go unnoticed, not to distort them, but to make them easier to see for what they are. That’s the purpose here. Not to push an agenda or create noise, but to provide clarity around local decisions, public processes, and the issues that affect everyday life in Buhl.

We didn’t come together overnight. We have been forming over time through conversations, shared observations, and a growing awareness that patterns start to stand out when you take the time to look. Recently, that awareness has only grown stronger, and with it, the sense that more clarity is needed around the decisions and processes that shape everyday life here.

This is meant to be citizen-oriented, because it is. We are your friend, your neighbor, the postal worker, the clerk at the grocery store, the person at the gas station, the police officer. We're the people who live here, move through the same streets, and care about what happens in this community. There isn’t one voice behind it, and there isn’t one perspective. It’s a reflection of the fact that more people are paying attention than it might seem.

At its core, this is simple. Buhl Lantern exists to bring light to local decisions, public processes, and the things that affect this community. Not to tell anyone what to think, and not to create unnecessary noise, but to make sure people have a clearer view of what’s happening and why it matters.

If this is something that resonates with you—if you’ve seen things, heard things, or simply want to be more involved—message the page to find out how to contribute. The more people who are paying attention, the stronger the community becomes.

Buhl belongs to the people who live here, and people deserve to understand what’s being done in their name.

“The price of liberty is eternal vigilance.” — Thomas Jefferson