A 50% property tax cut is back on the table for homeowners in Wyoming.
The House passed Senate File 69 on a 42-19 vote Wednesday night, but not before considering 21 separate amendments on the bill and engaging more than five hours of debate.
The first nine amendments were rejected before an amendment bringing back the original 50% cut was passed. The Wyoming Freedom Caucus, which has a majority in the chamber, got its way on every amendment its members proposed. This was in contrast to last Thursday, when its members split on the bill.
Big Changes Made
Entering Wednesday, the bill gave a 50% cut based on the growth of assessed value on a home from 2019-2024, for home values up to $2 million. For example, if the property taxes on a home in 2019 grew from $3,000 to $4,000 by 2024, the homeowner would get $500 forever chopped off his bill, but nothing more.
That amendment was voted out of SF 69, which has now been returned to a flat 50% cut along with a 50% backfill of revenue for local governments and schools. Proponents of the bill said fears that it will gut public services in Wyoming are overblown and inaccurate.
The plan, which is very similar to another property tax bill the House passed earlier this session, will next move to the Senate for concurrence.
The Senate has sat on that bill and passed SF 69 without a backfill, an issue that will likely have to be hammered out between the two bodies in Joint Conference Committee (JCC) before it can move on to Gov. Mark Gordon.
Rep. Steve Harshman, R-Casper, warned the only thing that will come out of those discussions is a fight over backfill funding for local governments and schools, which he said “will make us all look back.”
He said SF 69 will drive Wyoming off a fiscal cliff while Rep. John Eklund, R-Cheyenne, called it “such a disaster,” expressing doubt it could pass through the JCC.
Strong Feelings
Harshman also said the 50% cut will cause more problems than it will solve and questioned whether the state can give up that much revenue. Rep. Karlee Provenza, D-Laramie, said the voters “were sold a lie” that property taxes come for free.
Rep. John Bear, R-Gillette, responded that this is the taxpayers’ money, comparing it to leaving it on the table rather than putting it on the table. He suggested that local governments may follow suit in the future.
He also believes the state doesn’t have a revenue problem, it has a spending problem, mentioning how the state passed a roughly $11 billion biennial budget last year when it would have taken $8.7 billion to run the state’s baseline services.
Bear said a misconception that legislators supporting a big tax cut haven’t been talking to their local governments. He viewed the $700 million the state put into savings last year as ignoring the issue of rising property tax rates.
A heated moment arose toward the end of the bill discussion, when Rep. Julie Jarvis, R-Casper, said the “bad” bill is politically motivated. This drew the ire of Rep. Tony Locke, R-Casper, who said Jarvis can’t speak on the motives of those pushing the bill.
50% Back
Rep. Ken Pendergraft, R-Sheridan, brought the amendment returning the bill to its original 50% cut for home values worth up to $1 million, while removing associated improved land from the tax cut, passing on a 34-26 vote.
Pendergraft said he and other Wyoming taxpayers deserve major tax relief.
“I have been paying taxes on unrealized capital gains for years,” he said. “The thought of getting a little of that back … is refreshing.”
Pendergraft originally supported the assessment-based cut last week, which he first saw as a light at the end of the tunnel of the ongoing debate over property tax reform. Now, Pendergraft believes that light was actually an oncoming train.
The financial impact of this bill is forecasted to be $200 million in its first year.
Locke also added an up to $225 million per year, 50% backfill to the bill Wednesday, which would last for two years, passing on a 44-17 vote. He said the issue of property tax relief comes down to putting food and money on people’s tables.
“The state is going to be wealthier when the people have some of their money,” he said.
The timing of this amendment lines up with a people’s tax initiative going to voters in 2026 that, if passed, would permanently cut property taxes by 50%. The bill approved Wednesday is a temporary, two-year cut.
Rep. Jayme Lien, R-Casper, also passed an amendment to the bill on a 39-21 vote creating a permanent 25% tax cut starting in 2027 if the citizen’s initiative is rejected by voters. This will cost $128 million per year.
Many have expressed concern about what effect cutting property taxes will have on local governments, emergency services and schools that depend on property tax revenue.
Rep. Mike Yin, D-Jackson, questioned the amendment’s supporters how passing it could be sustainable in the long term, comparing the commitment to a “titanium chain.”
Rep. Cody Wylie, R-Rock Springs, went further, saying it “force-feeds” voters into accepting a tax cut at that time.
Rep. Elissa Campbell, R-Casper, said 16% of the city of Casper’s budget comes from residential property taxes, and in smaller cities it’s an even larger cut of the pie. She mentioned how the state already passed a 4% cap on tax increases during the 2024 session.
“Why are we punishing our cities and counties forever when we’ve already solved the problem?” she questioned.
Bear disagreed, calling the future cut “a novel idea.”
He argued that local governments will have already had to cut their budgets as a result of the earlier tax cuts passed this year, so they should be able to handle a smaller cut in 2027.
Why 50%?
Some members of the Sweetwater County delegation held a public meeting last weekend where Wylie said concerns about defunding public services were clearly expressed.
Rep. Marlene Brady, R-Rock Springs, said this didn’t reflect the sentiment of the meeting and “an unintentional dumpster fire” has been lit at the municipal level to raise fears about a 50% cut. Wylie responded that Brady didn’t even attend the meeting, which she later admitted was true.
The 50% number was chosen for a cut largely picked because a citizen’s ballot initiative that qualified for the 2026 ballot invokes the same reduction.
“I just feel a little uncomfortable that we don’t seem to have any guiding principle here or data to decide which road is best,” Lawley said.
Rep. Art Washut, R-Casper agreed, mentioning how many counties haven’t seen anywhere near 50% growth in property tax revenue over the past five years.
“We’re going to be twisting ourselves into pretzels trying to do what’s fair for counties on the losing end of that calculus,” he said.
Rep. Joel Guggenmos, R-Riverton, said wherever the logic for the 50% cut comes from does not matter as this initiative set an expectation from the people for a 50% tax cut.
It took 30,251 valid signatures, roughly 5% of the state population and 12% of voters, to qualify for the ballot.
The voters did support a constitutional amendment last year that allows the Legislature to tax residential properties at a separate rate than others.
“They didn’t vote for that referendum, it hasn’t happened yet,” Yin said of the 50% proposal.
Rep. Martha Lawley, R-Worland, agreed and brought an amendment for a flat 25% tax cut with no backfill for local governments or schools. She said legitimate property tax relief needs to be provided for homeowners in more of a measured approach that recognizes her constituents are not monolithic and have a lot of different needs.
“We need to show the public we put a lot of thought into this,” she said.
Rep. J.D. Williams, R-Lusk, spoke in favor of the amendment, saying it creates a tax cut that allows the state to avoid having to provide backfills for local entities. Towards the end of the discussion he tried to bring an additional $72 million backfill to the bill that was rejected.
Reps. Jacob Wasserburger, R-Cheyenne, Jeremy Haroldson, R-Wheatland, and Locke spoke against the amendment, saying the tax cut must be higher.
The amendment was rejected on a 34-27 vote.
Backfill
Wylie compared the backfill approach to “Socialism.”
“The only guarantee you have in life is the opportunity to make something of yourself,” Wylie said. “Wyomingites don’t want something for free, they just want a good opportunity.”
Rep. Landon Brown, R-Cheyenne, brought an amendment for a 100% backfill funded by $250 million, which he described as a “feast.” This was in reference to many of the large tax cut supporters like Rep. Steve Johnson, R-Cheyene, say they were looking for as big a fish as possible to catch when it comes to offering tax relief.
Johnson responded, calling the proposal “a shiny new lure with no hook.” while Bear called it a “great white whale.”
A proposal was also unsuccessfully brought by Rep. Ken Clouston, R-Gillette, to remove the bill’s $100 million backfill.
“What I don’t want to see is our local communities to be dependent on backfill,” he said.
Bear supports the bill’s 50% backfill because of the roughly $3 billion the state has put into savings over the last two years.
“This backfill is still not 100%, they’re still going to have to tighten their belts a little bit,” he said.
Brown warned that providing backfills cannot last forever and will make local governments dependent on the state. Provenza agreed, mentioning how the House has already spent $278 million out of its Legislation Stabilization Reserve Account in this year’s session.
Rep. J.T. Larson, R-Rock Springs, said he’s consistently supported backfill but accused others of flip-flopping on it based on the political currents.
This drew Sheridan Republican Rep. Tom Kelly’s attention. He explained that he didn’t want to constrain hardship counties as a result of tax cuts although he doesn’t believe it’s a sustainable solution.
Some who have supported no backfills in the Senate have said taxpayers need to learn the ramifications of tax cuts.
Rep. Julie Jarvis, R-Casper, said backfills send a false image of long-term commitment. She views getting rid of the backfill as “a necessary evil.”
“The falsehood of 50% when it is completely unsustainable and does devastating things to our communities? I would vote that to just happen for two years versus 20 years,” she said.
She said getting $500 in property tax relief isn’t worth it when considering the loss in public services it cuts.
“That $500 bucks I got was totally worth it when I called 911 and no one showed up,” she said sarcastically.
Kelly disagreed with the viewpoint that taxpayers must learn the hard way about property taxes.
“That is an irresponsible and almost cruel way of looking at this,” Kelly said.
Defeated Amendments
Harshman once again unsuccessfully brought back his blockbuster proposal to mostly get rid of property taxes altogether while increasing the state’s sales tax by 0.78%.
Rep. Bob Nicholas, R-Cheyenne, spoke in favor of the amendment, saying it gives back $110 million to $120 million for taxpayers.
“I think you just got to have an open mind with this and try it,” he said.
Clouston unsuccessfully attempted to cut the tax exemption by half for the year of its implementation from 50% to 25%, and to have it based on county averages rather than on individual home assessments up to $2 million of home value. After the first year, the exemption would grow to up to 50%. A $100 million backfill would still remain. The financial impact of the amendment would be $208 million.
The amendment was rejected 51-10.
Clouston also brought the same amendment for home values up to $1 million and $500,000, which was rejected on 54-7 and 42-19 votes respectively.
Harshman brought an amendment that would have reduced the state’s tax assessment rate from 9.5% to 8.3%. He said it would cost local governments $19.5 million and schools $40 million.
“I’m going to respect the will of my constituents that send me down here on this mandate on this constitutional change,” Harshman said. “I’m for the people on this.”
A series of horse analogies ensued on this amendment, with legislators arguing for and against riding the bill, which took on a equine identity, into the tax promise land.
Bear said he supports this concept, but wants to pursue it through Senate File 153, a bill that’s currently being considered this session.
“I prefer keeping thar other horse in reserved should this one run out and break a leg,” he said.
Harshman’s amendment was rejected 39-22.
Clouston also unsuccessfully brought an amendment that would have changed the tax reduction to be based on the increase of market value rather than assessed value.
Washut described this solution as “a ray of sunshine,” for offering targeted relief rather than a broad cut. He said residential tax cuts amount to a redistribution of wealth from the minerals industry to taxpayers.
Clouston expressed skepticism that county governments are expanding off the tax revenue growth seen, which in his home county of Campbell amounted to $40 million.
Rep. Anne Lucas, R-Cheyenne, criticized the Laramie County government, which would lose around $4 million as a result of a 25% tax cut. She brought up how the county bought a highrise building last year for $5.5 to house its growing services.
Clouston promoted his amendments as reflecting county-specific tax growth, which he sees as the most fair and equitable way to address property tax relief.
“This is not a perfect bill, we’re not going to send a perfect bill over there,” he said.
Leo Wolfson can be reached at leo@cowboystatedaily.com.
