Halfway through legislative session, there's room for improvement
Wyoming lawmakers are past the midpoint of this year’s 37-day general session, and we wish we could say we’re encouraged by what we’ve seen so far.
Instead, members of the 68th Wyoming Legislature — especially in the House of Representatives — seem determined to push through legislation that could have serious negative impacts on the state for years to come. From a large-scale property tax cut without enough backfill that threatens public safety and local government services to a focus on hot-button national issues, rather than solving the state’s very real challenges, this session has been one disappointment after another.
The common refrain from newly elected legislators is that they have a “mandate” and that voters told them to do these things. From what we’ve heard — both through public testimony at the Capitol and in conversation — that mandate may not be as clear as they think.
The good news? It’s not too late to turn things around. As legislators consider bills that have crossed over from the other side of the Capitol, they have the opportunity to amend or defeat those things that stand to produce a variety of unintended consequences.
Based on our pre-session scorecard, here’s how we think legislators have done so far, along with some suggestions for improvement:
Supplemental budget
Point value: 10 (out of 20)
Key measures of success: Fund programs to help average Wyoming residents; balance short-term and long-term savings with wise expenditures; avoid cutting essential programs for the most vulnerable Wyoming residents.
Session to date: Before any joint conference committee discussions began, the spending difference between the supplemental budgets in the two legislative chambers was around $109 million. The Senate’s one-year budget adjustment contained $228 million in spending, while the House called for an additional $119.4 million over what was approved last year.
The three biggest differences were the amount of money allocated to backfill lost property tax revenue for local governments and special districts, wildfire grant funding and energy matching grants.
We’ll say more about property tax cuts in the next section, but as far as the supplemental budget goes, neither chamber has allocated nearly enough to mitigate the damage that would be done if the original proposed 50% cut is approved and becomes law.
Without going into all of the numbers, cuts of that scale could result in a major loss of funding for K-12 education and local municipalities, and both local law enforcement and fire districts have issued warnings of large-scale staff cuts and loss of coverage if they go through without sufficient backfill.
When it comes to helping residents recover from the impacts of last summer’s record fire season, we’d rather see more grant money offered than low-interest loans. With the state sitting on nearly $2 billion in liquid savings, we agree with Gov. Mark Gordon that $130 million isn’t an unreasonable request.
We also were disappointed to learn that lawmakers in both chambers rejected an amendment that would have added $18 million to the Wyoming Department of Health budget to offer grants to public hospitals to support delivery and maternity care. And, of course, the loss of $2.5 million to $3.3 million for preserving and beginning to revitalize the High Plains Arboretum — as well as declaring it a state historic site — is further evidence of just how focused lawmakers are on cutting expenses, rather than seeing them as an investment in the future.
Property tax relief
Point value: 10 (out of 20)
Key measures of success: State lawmakers should resist the urge to pass more property tax relief measures, since they haven’t given the ones passed in 2024 time to prove if they are sufficient. If they do pass more, they must ensure that measures are taken to backfill lost revenue to keep local governments whole and ensure K-12 education funding is adequate.
Session to date: Several state senators and members of the Wyoming Freedom Caucus, the hardline coalition in charge of the House of Representatives, have maintained throughout the session that residents say additional property tax relief is their top priority. That’s why Senate File 69 sailed through the Senate and is now being debated in the House (a similar bill, House Bill 169, has passed the House and awaits Senate action).
The version of SF 69 that crossed over would grant a 50% property value exemption for up to $1 million of assessed value on a single-family home and associated improved land for two years — 2025 and 2026. Before any changes this week, the House’s supplemental budget bill included $72 million in backfill to help cover local governments’ revenue loss, while the Senate allocated just $15 million for first-responder and health care special districts.
On Thursday, Rep. Ken Clouston, R-Gillette, brought an amendment that proposes a county-by-county approach to property tax relief that’s based on a percentage of increase in a home’s value, rather than an across-the-board, 50% cut to the value of every home statewide. Unfortunately, it contains no backfill.
We agree with Rep. Martha Lawley, R-Worland, that, if additional property tax relief truly is needed (which is unclear at this point), lawmakers must provide an adequate amount of backfill to avoid the unintended consequences of losing vital services.
While most Wyoming residents probably would like to see their tax bill shrink, the state’s property taxes are already among the lowest in the country. If any version of this bill is allowed to become law, it must be one that does no harm to those who depend on that revenue.
Election security/integrity
Point value: 5 (out of 10)
Key measures of success: Pass bills that further enhance election security and boost voter confidence in the system. Reject bills that unnecessarily limit the ability of Wyoming residents to participate in their democracy.
Session to date: Our score in this section would have been lower if not for the fact that a ballot-harvesting bill was amended to allow senior care facility staff to transport absentee ballots to the elections office. Plus, there’s still time for the Senate to kill many of these unnecessary bills.
While Secretary of State Chuck Gray sends out a news release celebrating the passage of every bill in his multi-pronged “election security” agenda, we continue to see these measures as a solution in search of a problem. That’s especially true when it comes to banning ballot drop boxes, which have more upsides than down, and banning ranked choice voting, which should be a decision made by local officials based on the preferences of their communities.
As we said previously, we support requiring proof of both U.S. citizenship and Wyoming residency through “true” photo ID and other measures at voter registration, as long as it’s not overly difficult to obtain the necessary documentation. And we’re open to suggested changes to voter list maintenance, if needed. But to try to ban touchscreen voting and return to pen-and-paper ballots is both unnecessary and nonsensical at this point.
Addressing key local needs
Point value: 15 (out of 20)
Key measures of success: Lawmakers should focus their attention on legislation that will help address key local needs, such as affordable housing and public safety.
Session to date: Again, the potential impact of large-scale property tax cuts without sufficient backfill alone should make this a lower score. Plus, House Bill 68, which would have allowed tax increment financing for affordable housing projects other than in blighted areas, didn’t even get a committee hearing before the deadline, even though much work had gone into it during the interim between sessions.
Otherwise, it’s been a mixed bag for addressing local needs. House Bill 85, which allows local approval of simulcasting venues, passed the House and moved to the Senate, while Senate File 6, allowing for increased penalties for squatting, has crossed over to the House. Yet SF 12’s creation of permanent protection orders didn’t get a hearing in the Senate before deadline.
Going forward, state lawmakers need to be conscious of passing bills that take away local control or put up roadblocks to actions that would benefit local communities and residents.
Hot-button topics
Point value: 3 (out of 10)
Key measures of success: Attend to issues that will have the most impact in Wyoming, but avoid passing bills simply for the sake of scoring political points.
Session to date: Most of the bills mentioned in our initial editorial have passed through the House, including HB 32’s definition of “woman,” HB 42’s regulation of surgical abortions and HB 64’s requirement for an ultrasound before taking abortion pills.
We encouraged lawmakers to prioritize these and other hot-button topics in consideration of Wyoming-specific contexts, but so far we don’t hear much discussion of anything but national talking points. In the case of the ultrasound bill, we believe it willfully ignores the problems it would create for women living in remote parts of the state without close access to a clinic offering this service (not to mention that it’s likely not enforceable).
Wyoming’s citizen legislature meets for a short amount of time each year, and it’s disappointing to see lawmakers waste that time on bills such as these that don’t fix anything important to the daily lives of the state’s residents.
Cooperation/diplomacy
Point value: 15 (out of 20)
Key measures of success: Elected officials work together in the best interest of Wyoming residents, remain respectful of one another and show the same respect to their constituents, even when they disagree.
Session to date: We said last month that we hoped new lawmakers would remember that a so-called “mandate” doesn’t mean just doing whatever the majority believes voters want. It means doing what’s best for all residents, not just those who voted for legislators to the detriment of everyone else.
So far, though, we don’t see them taking this into account. On the House side, especially, the priority of many lawmakers seems to be to get their agenda through, regardless of who it might negatively impact.
And while there haven’t been any ugly shouting matches or bumping into one another in an aggressive way so far this session (that we know of), that doesn’t mean it’s all sunshine and unicorns. Earlier this week, in fact, Rep. Steve Harshman, R-Casper, called out Rep. John Bear, R-Gillette, for his op-ed characterizing some lawmakers as professional lobbyists in disguise.
All in all, the 68th Wyoming Legislature has, so far, proven to be a less well-informed, equally stalwart version of the 67th. There’s still time to prove us wrong, and we sincerely hope they end up earning an “A” grade. Because their success means we’re all more likely to be successful, too.