Legislative leaders contemplate a special session to address SF 54, hours after denying it

Sen. Cheri Steinmetz, R-Lingle, also asked for a special session over the weekend. Both Bear and Steinmetz said they wished to override some of the governor’s vetoes on bills from the previous week.

Leadership in the Legislature originally denied these requests Monday morning, arguing it was not worth the sacrifice of lawmakers’ time away from their jobs and families. They also estimated a special session would take eight to 10 days, costing up to $350,000 in taxpayer money.

However, in another news release sent Monday night, Senate President Ogden Driskill, R-Devils Tower, and House Speaker Albert Sommers, R-Pinedale, said a special session might be necessary — specifically so they could override the governor’s veto of a property tax bill.

“We believe it is likely still worthwhile to consider a special legislative session to enact meaningful property tax relief this year,” they wrote in Monday night’s release. “We are in discussions with Governor Gordon and legislative leadership on the next appropriate course of action. We will send further information on this issue in the very near future.”

Last week, Gordon vetoed a property tax bill that would have provided tax relief for all Wyoming homeowners. Senate File 54, “Homeowner tax exemption,” would have provided a 25% exemption for all Wyoming homeowners up to the first $2 million of assessed value for a residential property.

The bill was set to be in effect for two years and included a backfill from the state to make up for tax revenue loss in local districts and municipalities that depend on property tax revenue. The fiscal impact of this backfill hasn’t been determined, but was estimated to be at least $220 million.

The impact on the state seemed to be a major reason why the governor chose to veto this legislation.

“The Bidenomic-type of ‘tax relief’ in this bill is what I would expect from Washington, D.C. liberals, not conservative Wyoming legislators,” Gordon said in a veto letter accompanying a late Thursday news release. “It is a temporary relief measure that could lead to budget shortfalls, and will ultimately be paid for by raising taxes on our children.”

Lawmakers argued this relief was meant to be only temporary, not a permanent solution. Rep. Steven Harshman, R-Casper, previously told the Wyoming Tribune Eagle the state had a recent surplus in revenue from its minerals industry, so he thought this was a good time to take advantage of that surplus and give Wyoming homeowners a break.

“It wasn’t gonna be a long-term deal,” Harshman said. “It was disappointing, because I think folks would have really welcomed that.”

County assessors are required to include notification of property tax exemptions on the 2024 assessment schedule mailed out to Wyoming property owners by the fourth Monday of April. The Department of Revenue updated legislators, however, and told them that notification of this exemption isn’t required, and the exemption can shared with property owners in their September tax bills.

Department of Revenue Director Brenda Henson told the WTE in an email Tuesday morning that the county assessor must provide a tax roll to the county treasurer by the third Monday of August, under state law. All tax exemptions must be posted prior to the tax roll, she said.

“Assessors would need time to process and post any exemption on the applicable accounts. The amount of time needed depends greatly on the criteria of the exemption,” Henson said in the email. “Should a bill include the same provisions as SF 54, July 1st should provide sufficient time.”

It’s unclear at this point when a special session would take place, if one is called, and how long it would last.

Pandora’s box

Henson told legislative leaders on Friday it wouldn’t be possible to implement the tax reduction this year. The department director initially said this tax exemption would need to be included with property assessments sent out in April.

It was from that initial assertion that Driskill and Sommers publicly denied calls for a special session, Sommers told the WTE on Tuesday. However, Henson updated them on Monday morning after further reflection, and said the tax exemption proposed under SF 54 wasn’t required to be attached to the April assessments, but had to be included in the September tax bills.

Sommers said that, for the sake of transparency, he and Driskill felt obligated to announce the possibility of a special session based on this update.

“I didn’t want it out there that somehow we had lied in that first (release), because we hadn’t. We were just misinformed,” Sommers said.

However, the House speaker said he was still against a special session, for many of the same reasons that were listed in their Monday morning statement.

“We’re still trying to examine and understand all of these implications, and whether a special session is worth it or not,” Sommers said. “I’m leaning against it, you know, but I haven’t made any decisions.”

The Legislature’s rules would need to be suspended in order to specifically address a single bill, such as SF 54, Sommers said. But starting another session could be problematic, he said, because using it to address only the provisions in SF 54 isn’t guaranteed. Members of the Legislature would need to constrain themselves to the special rules and agree upon what they’re going to discuss.

“That’s the challenge,” Sommers said. “I don’t know that there’s agreement on that.”

The special session would be limited to 20 days and bound by the rules of the 67th Legislature. The Management Council could set a calendar for the session, Sommers added, but “calendars have been blown through before.”

“I am leaning against a special session because I just fear that it opens Pandora’s box,” Sommers said. “We will not be disciplined enough to hold ourselves to one topic … we’ll want to go after a lot of things.”

Lawmakers wouldn’t be able to directly override vetoes made by the governor in a special session; they would have to start over from the beginning and pass new legislation, which would then go back to the governor’s desk. Only then would lawmakers have the chance to override any gubernatorial vetoes, but their time would be constitutionally restrained to 20 days.

“I really don’t look forward to opening up the budget again, to having a whole variety of amendments brought to the budget in a special session,” Sommers said.

The House speaker said he was concerned about ‘“opening that floodgate” and its timely impacts. The Management Council, which is comprised of legislative leaders from both chambers, is scheduled to meet Monday to discuss topics for the interim. Sommers said he wasn’t sure how a 20-day special session would affect the process leading to next year’s general session.

Not to mention this is also an election year, which means individuals trying to run for office need time to devote their campaigns. Also, because Wyoming has a citizen Legislature, lawmakers would need to request time off from their jobs.

Special sessions are meant for emergency situations, and Sommers added he was worried over what kind of precedent this would set, with lawmakers calling for a special session every time things don’t go their way.

“Are we moving closer and closer to a full-time legislature?” Sommers said. “Isn’t that growing government?”

A vote for a vote

All 93 members of the Legislature were recently emailed a poll, asking if they supported a vote to call for a special session. Sommers said, under Wyoming statute, the Legislature needs 35% support from lawmakers to call for a special session vote.

Legislative leaders could also step in at any time and ask for a vote directly, however.

Unless leadership steps in, lawmakers have until 5 p.m. Friday to submit their forms. A full vote for a special session requires a simple majority in both the House and the Senate, Sommers said.

The House speaker told the WTE he couldn’t say when a special session would happen or how long it would last, other than within the 20-day time frame.