Investment modernization-state nonpermanent funds.
SF0070 modernizes the investment and spending rules for two Wyoming statutory trust funds: the Wyoming cultural trust fund and the Wyoming wildlife and natural resource trust account. The bill removes the “inviolate”/perpetual treatment from specified fund balances so the state can invest them more flexibly, including in equities, with the goal of improving long-term returns while still preserving corpus and maintaining safety and liquidity standards. It also creates or clarifies separate income accounts for each fund and directs investment earnings into those income accounts rather than treating all earnings as permanently locked into the principal.
The bill establishes formal spending policies for both funds. For the cultural trust fund, annual grants are capped at 3% of the fund’s five-year average market value, with a phased-in calculation beginning in fiscal year 2026. For the wildlife and natural resource trust account, annual spending is capped at 4% of the five-year average market value, also phased in over several years. The bill specifies that certain special appropriations, donations, prior-year unused amounts, and already obligated funds are excluded from the spending cap, and it preserves the treatment of money deposited before July 1, 2025 under the prior rules. It also removes both funds from the Pool A investment account and makes conforming and repealing changes to related statutes.
In practical terms, the bill changes how these state trust funds are managed, invested, and distributed, affecting the State Treasurer, the State Loan and Investment Board, the cultural trust board, and the wildlife and natural resource trust board. It is designed to increase investment flexibility and create predictable annual distribution limits tied to market value, which may stabilize grant funding over time while potentially increasing returns. It also preserves existing restrictions on eligible grant recipients and the purposes for which wildlife trust grants may be used.
The overall sentiment appears generally favorable, especially among appropriators and on final passage, reflecting support for updating fund management and spending rules. The bill advanced through committee with unanimous recommendations in both chambers’ appropriations committees, and it passed the Senate and House by substantial margins. However, the House amendment failed on a narrower vote, indicating some disagreement over the details of the investment or spending changes even though the final bill still passed comfortably.
The main points of contention appear to have centered on the policy shift away from inviolate/perpetual treatment and the extent to which the state should be allowed to spend or invest earnings from these trust funds. Supporters likely viewed the bill as a modernization measure to improve returns and create clearer spending discipline, while opponents may have been concerned about reducing protections for dedicated trust assets or changing long-standing restrictions on fund principal and earnings.
SF0070 amends Wyoming statutes governing the cultural trust fund and the wildlife and natural resource trust account, including provisions on investment authority, income accounts, grant administration, and spending limits. It repeals inconsistent provisions, removes these funds from Pool A, and establishes phased-in annual spending policies based on a percentage of five-year average market value. The bill also preserves pre-July 1, 2025 deposits under prior law, meaning older balances remain subject to the rules that existed before this act took effect.
The bill appears to have been broadly supported in the Legislature, with strong committee recommendations and large final passage margins in both chambers. The appropriations committees in both the Senate and House recommended do pass, and the bill ultimately passed the Senate and House decisively. The failed House amendment suggests some disagreement over specifics, but not enough to derail the underlying measure.
The principal controversy was over changing the legal status of the affected trust funds from inviolate/perpetual to a more flexible investment structure. Critics of such changes would likely worry about weakening protections for dedicated public funds, while supporters emphasized greater investment potential, higher risk-adjusted returns, and clearer spending rules. The House amendment failure indicates that at least some members disagreed about the exact scope or mechanics of those changes, even though the final bill retained broad support.