There’s an old saying about three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics.
Watching the campaign for Wyoming’s Proposition One, a proposed 50% tax cut for home structures of qualifying residents, I’m reminded why statistics earned their own category.
Let’s start with what’s true. Property taxes spiked after COVID for most Wyoming homeowners. People demanded relief, and they got it. The Legislature passed a 25% homeowner exemption, a 4% annual cap on assessment increases, and a 50% exemption for homeowners 65 and older who’ve paid Wyoming property taxes for at least 25 years.
You’d never know it from some of the numbers Prop One supporters are using.
Take state Rep. Ann Lucas, R-Cheyenne.
On Oct. 17, Townsquare Media reported Lucas saying property taxes on her family’s home had gone up more than 70% since 2019.
Laramie County Treasurer records tell a different story. Her 2019 bill was $2,102.89. It peaked in 2024 at $3,127.54. That’s a 48.7% increase. Painful, but well short of 70%.
Then relief kicked in. Her 2025 bill was $2,113.99, only $11.10 more than in 2019. Her 2026 bill, dated Aug. 26, is $2,122.34.
That’s less than a 1% increase over seven years. Shouldn’t her public statements reflect what she’s actually paying?
Supporters cite statewide increases of 70% or 73% since 2019. Those increases are on residential sale prices, not proof that property bills increased by that amount. The actual increases are what homeowners paid before the Legislature acted. Leave out the relief and you’re describing a tax bill most Wyoming homeowners no longer get.
Then there’s the claim that Wyoming governments are sitting on so much money they can easily absorb another cut.
Much of that argument traces back to "B. Alfred Marshall," an online persona that runs a website called “By The Numbers.” The name doesn't appear in Wyoming's voter rolls, which begs questions of whether he's a figment, a closet politician himself, or an out-of-stater with unseemly interest in Wyoming.
But "Marshall" adds up several years of county revenues exceeding expenditures and calls the accumulated difference a surplus.
Former state Representative Marti Halverson, a vocal Prop One supporter whose house is valued at $3 million, cites billions in government reserves and cash. Wyoming Republican Party Chairman Bryan Miller says state savings and surpluses can replace lost local revenue.
Their claims appear to come from Marshall’s work.
Impressive numbers. But how much of that money is legally restricted? How much is already committed? How much came from one-time revenue that won’t recur? And where’s the dependable income that replaces property taxes year after year?
A reserve account isn’t a paycheck. And money set aside for one purpose can’t automatically go to another.
And there’s a bigger problem.
Roughly 69% of property taxes go to K-12 schools. The Wyoming Constitution requires the state to fund public education, and our school finance system makes the state cover the gap when local school revenue falls short.
Cut local school revenue and the state picks up the difference.
So the next time someone tells you the state has plenty of money to cover everything, ask a simple question: how much is left after schools get what the law requires?
Prop One’s opponents also need to be careful. Your county isn’t going to turn off the lights. But without replacement money, some things will shrink or worsen.
There’s a difference between the two sides, though. Prop One’s backers are asking you to change the law. The burden of getting the numbers right falls on them.
So what does Prop One actually do?
The existing 25% exemption covers your home and the land under it, up to the first $1 million of fair market value.
Prop One offers 50% off the assessed value of the house alone. Not the land.
And you don’t get both.
Here’s what that looks like for a $350,000 home sitting on $80,000 of land. Today the 25% exemption takes $87,500 off the taxable value. Prop One would take half of the $270,000 house, or $135,000. Compared with what that homeowner pays now, the bill drops about 18%.
Not 50%.
That’s real money for some families. It’s also a long way from the headline number.
The Legislature’s 25% exemption went through committee hearings and floor amendments. Prop One skips all of that. You get one vote: yes or no. That’s all the more reason to demand accurate numbers before you mark your ballot.
Property tax relief is a legitimate goal. So is holding the line on government spending. Neither one excuses passing off 2024 tax bills as today’s, or counting committed money as spare cash.
Here’s what bothers me most.
If the strongest arguments for Prop One depend on tax bills that no longer exist and money that isn’t available, what’s left of the argument?
Statistics ought to help Wyoming voters understand their choices. But when people torture them for their own ends, they do the opposite.
We deserve better.
Gail Symons can be reached at GailSymons@mac.com
