City Government
Governments Run Amok
March 1, 2014 
Where do we start?
The GUARDIAN has been in warmer climes for three weeks and comes home to chaos–or is always like this?
–Top item in the foolishness file is the Idaho legislature’s apparent push to get guns on campus. The amazing thing to us is not the wacko legislators–we always have them–but the fact they have enough votes to pass these bills. College kids and concealed weapons equals trouble.
–Then there is the appropriation of $1,000,000 to defend the gay marriage ban in Idaho. Folks, whether you are muslim, christian, gay or straight, times are a changing and the choice of sleep mates is not something the government can regulate.
–The so-called AG GAG law signed by the guv is nothing more than a smoke screen to protect farmers from outside scrutiny. There is no doubt farmers benefit from healthy stock, but to make it a crime to gather proof of abuse is simply wrong. Had the animal advocates simply “reported” a dairy farm had employees mistreating animals, the allegations would have been dismissed. With graphic video as proof, it is hard to deny.
–The legislature has or is about to pass a law denying cities the ability to have “design review” for any projects at the local level. No doubt, this came to light in part when Boise City put the brakes on a state parking garage last year, but later relented.
–We can’t forget the wolves. One group worked for years to “reintroduce” the nearly extinct wolves in Idaho and now the government is spending millions to “control” the wolves. It just isn’t nice to fool Mother Nature–she will eventually get even. Big issue will be wolf attacks on horse and dogs near Sun Valley.
To insure more advertising-free Boise Guardian news, please consider financial support.
Comments & Discussion
Comments are closed for this post.
Mar 2, 2014, 10:14 am
Time to vote OUT these crazy people. Haven’t we had enough of the good old boy politics yet? The only sad part is potential replacement candidates are different versions of the same old story.
Mar 2, 2014, 1:58 pm
re: the colt killed in the Croy Creek area; here is a link to the accounting of what happened. Granted, the particular website is assuredly anti-wolf: Warning graphic photos at the bottom of the linked post.
http://www.idahoforwildlife.com/2-content/41-sun-valley-colt
Mar 2, 2014, 10:46 pm
You forgot one more item, however this one is more along the lines of citizens gone off the deep end. Former state senator Nicole “I always have an agenda” Lefavour parading almost 3 dozen people around the state capitol blocking doors which promptly got them arrested by the state police. By looking at the sheriff’s arrest report the next day I was totally disgusted to see that 80% of the people she marched into the capitol were people between the ages of 50 to 80 something. Not that people in this age bracket don’t have an opinion but there is something wrong with her asking these people to help her further her agenda by asking them to volunteer to be arrested. She should have been arrested for abuse of the elderly.
EDITOR NOTE–The fun part will come when it’s time to prosecute. Will the prosecutor actually spend the time to convict these folks or simply dismiss the charges? It is common to use the law to get rid of the protestors and then drop charges. Will the elderly criminals even plead their innocence based on the right to assemble etc.?
Mar 3, 2014, 7:30 am
Just another day in Idaho. Seems like what is rational, and logical, is always the complete opposite of what is done by our legislature and courts.
Good quote that sums it all up…
“The law, I say, not only turned from its proper purpose but made to follow an entirely contrary purpose! The law became the weapon of every kind of greed! Instead of checking crime, the law itself is guilty of the evils it is supposed to punish!”
-Frederic Bastiat
Welcome to the 21st century Idaho, where shooting for the moon is a felony!
Mar 3, 2014, 8:19 am
Let’s try to stay on topic here or is this about arresting the elderly? I would really like someone to explain where the line is on videoing on prvt property. Seems to me like we are opening a can that should be left alone…
Mar 3, 2014, 1:06 pm
The legislation dealing with local design review makes me chuckle. I have long thought that local governments have too much power and discretion. Apparently, now that the state has had a bad experience with their parking garage, the issue is ripe for legislative action. But, rest assured, there are many folks out there that have been jerked around for years by this design review and planning and zoning committees.
Mar 3, 2014, 2:20 pm
Welcome back, Mr. Guardian! You and your sharp commentary were missed.
I don’t see ANY of those contentious issues as “no brainers.” They are complicated, and deciding either way will result in both winners and losers.
Thank goodness our enlightened legislators can work things out, huh? (/sarcasm)
Except for maybe … if a ravening wolf knocked Sun Valley Gold Medalist Kaitlyn Farrington off her snowboard and was dragging her into the woods… and then a shirtless Bruce Willis intervened and dispatched the wolf with a Bowie knife, couldn’t that be a good thing?
Mar 3, 2014, 6:04 pm
Rick: re your request for definition of the limits for videotaping on on pvt property….
The bill prohibits photographing “agricultural production” occurring on an “agricultural production facility” and those are so broadly defined that even a sugar beet truck driving on I 84 and spilling beats onto the highway would be protected from being photographed or videotaped to provide evidence to support a complaint about it.
Mar 3, 2014, 8:33 pm
There is no way that it can be stretched to an incident on a public road. To insinuate that is not only ludicrous but it seems to be a blatant attempt at spin. You might need to come up with a better argument.
Mar 4, 2014, 2:18 am
Rick, please read the bill. It includes ag activities on private AND public lands. It is a very broadly written bill. While you may dismiss the beet truck scenario without knowing the contents, language, and intent of the bill, the poster is accurately portraying a possible outcome given the language in the bill.
Go to idaho.gov and click on legislative bill center. You can search by subject or bill number.
Mar 4, 2014, 11:06 am
Maltreatment of a sugar beet
Mar 4, 2014, 8:49 pm
Eric I am looking at the bill right now. SB1298 correct? it talks a lot about entering an ag production facility by force threat or misrepresentation or without the owners consent. You are right it does say public lands used for ag production, not public roads.
Yeahbut you may need to read it also… and not listen to what the guy next door tells you
I guess those opposed to this feel that if someone does not like how you treat your dog they should have the right to force their way onto your property to get evidence…. remember… only the cops can do that and they do it way too often.
Mar 4, 2014, 11:57 pm
Las Vegas Rebel – with all due respect, I disagree with your point about the demographic of those who choose to exercise their freedom of assembly, and I especially dismiss your allusion that a former state senator willingly got local senior citizens into harm’s way. There have been several bouts of people incarcerated for such an obstruction; people whose ages range far beyond the limited perspective you offer about “abuse” of the “elderly.” If my 80-year-old Godmother and 75-year-old mother lived nearby, they would gladly volunteer to link arms with anyone else who felt the Legislature was ignorant to the pleas of those who should be treated fairly.
Mar 5, 2014, 7:22 am
Rick, SB1298 includes this language…..
13 (viii) Transporting agricultural products to or from an agriculcultural facility
That bill was replaced by SB1337 which is the version passed into law. That bill omitted the transportation citation so you are right…..my example is no longer valid.
Your comment about mistreatment of a sugar beet illuminates the issue I tried to raise; people are focused on just high-profile animal abuse, but this bill ( now this law) extends to cover way more than abuse situations and prohibits citizens from using photography to document almost any situation occurring within very broadly defined agricultural settings.
Mar 5, 2014, 9:59 am
I am confused, then what is the problem? If it restricts someone from trespassing and recording where is the foul? We in Idaho as well as 37 other state have always been able to record both audio and video with only the consent of 1 party. I guess I am confused as to why you are against ii.
BTW in the spirit of full disclosure the posts from both rick and Rick are both me…. only difference is the device I am on
Mar 5, 2014, 10:59 am
S1337 The Agricultural Interference Bill ( now law ) was reorganized in its final version so the video and photography prohibitions are limited to non-public locations and absence of the owners permission to enter or and photograph. I think that’s reasonable.
Dare I think all my letter and comment writing about this actually had an effect!?!
Mar 5, 2014, 1:07 pm
I really think that’s what is intended… the only public land that I can think of that would qualify as a production would be range land leased to ranchers and if it leased it is no longer free access. Not many farmers/ranchers produce any thing on purely public lands. I think the key here in (produce) leaves out highways, parks and the like.
Mar 5, 2014, 7:44 pm
Crazy is as crazy represents.
Legislators may be getting crazy, but they only represent the constituents. Like it or not, the majority of people are a bit wacked, especially when it comes to emotional issues.
It’s like the Jay Leno skits of street interviews—
Mar 5, 2014, 9:43 pm
Easterner, it would be soooo nice if the represented they constituent. They do not… and knowingly so. They represent whoever gives them the most money and perks. And in the case of some of the supreme leaders like BO, Reid, and Polossi, It becomes completely about their power hungry narcissistic personalities.
The Jay Leno skit is truth. The average person really is that dim and apathetic, thus allowing the electorate to follow the money.