Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Merchant Licensing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council approves eased rules for internet merchants and door-to-door sales after debate over enforcement
Summary
The Mills City Council voted to approve Resolution 2026-10, which eases certain restrictions on internet merchants and door-to-door solicitors; councilors expressed concern about enforcement for out-of-state solicitors and whether background checks should remain required on the application.
Get email alerts on the Merchant Licensing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Mills City Council on an evening motion approved Resolution 2026-10, a measure that adjusts licensing requirements for internet merchants and unsolicited door-to-door sales, after a round of debate about enforcement and background checks.
A council member said the original intent of earlier, stricter rules was to reduce the number of door-to-door solicitors and warned that loosening requirements could "revert back to everybody coming through with their cat, dog, and whatever." The council discussed whether some stipulations were overly stringent and whether the city should require in-state (Wyoming) background checks for people who do not live in-state.
Councilors noted that certain checks—such as a Wyoming background check and driving-record review—were included on the application but not explicitly written into the ordinance text. One council member said requiring those items on the application was intended to establish that solicitors were legitimate businesses, and suggested that liability and enforcement mechanisms should rest with businesses rather than the city.
At least one council member cited a recent local complaint about an out-of-state company that had solicited door-to-door late in the evening, saying residents reported knocks at ‘‘9:00, 10:00 at night’’ and that such incidents were visible on social media. That example was used to argue for retaining some limits even if other provisions were relaxed.
Despite those concerns and a proposal to table the item for further discussion, the council voted to approve Resolution 2026-10. The motion passed with five ayes and no recorded nays. Councilors said the ordinance could be tightened again later if problems reemerged.
The council then moved on to an executive session on a personnel matter and returned to adjourn without further action on the licensing item.

