SF0099 changes how real property owned by the Wyoming Game and Fish Commission is treated for property tax purposes. The bill generally exempts that real property from ad valorem property taxation, but preserves taxation for property used for wildlife management purposes or employee residences, and it retains a special tax structure for commission-owned property used for other purposes. In effect, it narrows and clarifies the tax treatment of commission-owned land and facilities while keeping some categories of property within the tax base.
The bill also amends the special tax provision so that, for covered commission property, the tax is calculated in lieu of ad valorem tax based on the amount that would have been owed if the property were taxed like similar property at fair market value. The act applies prospectively and does not affect any tax assessment or collection before January 1, 2026. The effective date is January 1, 2026.
Impact
The bill amends Wyoming property tax statutes, specifically W.S. 39-11-105(a)(xxxvi) and 39-13-103(b)(xii)(A) and (II), to create a broader exemption for Wyoming Game and Fish Commission real property while preserving special tax treatment for certain uses. It affects the state’s property tax base by removing most commission-owned real property from ad valorem taxation, but it leaves in place taxation for wildlife management property and employee residences, and it maintains a special valuation rule for other commission property. The measure is prospective only and does not alter prior assessments or collections.
Sentiment
The available voting history shows strong support and no recorded opposition. The bill was recommended do pass by the Senate Travel committee and the Senate Appropriations committee on unanimous 5-0 votes, and it passed the Senate on third reading 31-0. With no committee transcript provided, there is no evidence of substantive controversy in the record supplied, and the vote pattern suggests broad agreement on the bill’s approach.
Contention
No specific points of contention are documented in the provided materials. The only likely policy issue is the scope of the exemption: whether commission-owned property should be fully exempt, partially exempt, or remain subject to special taxation depending on use. Any debate would likely center on revenue impacts to local taxing districts versus the state’s interest in reducing or simplifying taxes on Game and Fish Commission property, but the record here shows unanimous support rather than division.