Senate, House leaders agree on 25% property tax cut
CHEYENNE – Thursday morning, lawmakers in a joint conference committee signed an agreement to offer a 25% property tax cut to Wyoming homeowners.
The measure still has to pass both the Senate and House of Representatives, and be allowed to become law by Gov. Mark Gordon.
As of Thursday morning, Senate File 69, 'Homeowner property tax exemption,' includes a 25% property tax exemption starting in 2025 on residential structures and improved land up to $1 million of the fair market value. The exemption is not available if a homeowner receives a 50% long-term homeowner exemption passed in 2024, according to Rep. Tony Locke, R-Casper, who sat on the JCC.
Rep. Tony Locke, R-Casper (2025)
Rep. Tony Locke, R-Casper
Beginning in the second year, the exemption extends only to owner-occupied homes, with the consideration that it will also apply to deployed military members. The 25% cut would be ongoing, meaning the bill includes no sunset date.
'It has been clear from the very beginning that the people of Wyoming wanted property tax relief,' Sen. Tim Salazar, R-Riverton, said. 'This is about one of the most important issues in the Legislature, and I want to compliment the House because I know they also wanted property tax relief.'
Sen. Tim Salazar soaks in the moment
Sen. Tim Salazar, R-Riverton, soaks in a moment on the Senate floor Thursday during the 68th Wyoming Legislature's general session.
Salazar said that after negotiations on the bill stalled on Tuesday morning, leaders decided to move forward. Friday is the deadline to send bills to the governor in order to allow time for veto override votes, if necessary.
House Majority Floor Leader Rep. Scott Heiner, R-Green River, said the House Republican Caucus met on Wednesday to discuss SF 69.
Rep. Scott Heiner, R-Green River
Rep. Scott Heiner, R-Green River, works at his desk on the floor of the House of Representatives on Feb. 7.
'We also ran a bunch of numbers based on the proposal that was offered Tuesday. We would like to accept the Senate's position that was offered on Tuesday morning,' Heiner said.
He did request that the Senate agree to provide backfill for local governments in the bill, especially considering a Senate announcement Wednesday night that that chamber would not pass a supplemental budget at all.
'With the press release that came out last night that the supplemental budget will not be brought out for consideration, we would like to offer the (House) position on backfill be included in this bill,' Heiner said, adding that special districts, in particular, rely on property taxes and need the backfill.
Salazar responded that while the Senate appreciated the attempt, the body could not agree to a deal on SF 69 that included backfill.
'The Senate position is that backfill is not needed. We were at 50%, and now we are at 25%. We feel that at 25%, the (impact) is negligible,' Salazar said, noting that the supplemental budget is 'off the table and gone.'
Rather than let SF 69 die because of an inability to reach a deal, Heiner said the House would accept the Senate's position.
'This is something that provides immediate tax relief. It is important that we do something this year and not kick the can down the road,' Heiner said. 'So rather than lose the bill, we will withdraw that proposal and go with the Senate position.'
Salazar noted that the bill must still pass on the floor in both chambers. Locke said to expect it that vote today in the House.
If signed by the governor or allowed to become law without his signature, SF 69 would be 'effective immediately,' according to Locke.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
16 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Kristi Noem defends the deployment of National Guard troops to Los Angeles protests
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said in an interview over the weekend that National Guard troops deployed amid protests in the Los Angeles area are for "the safety of the communities that are being impacted by these riots." "They're there at the direction of the president in order to keep peace and allow people to be able to protest, but also to keep law and order," Noem told Margaret Brennan, moderator of "Face the Nation" on CBS News. President Donald Trump ordered about 2,000 National Guard troops to be deployed as police in riot gear clashed with protesters opposed to the actions his administration has taken against undocumented immigrants. However, California Gov. Gavin Newsom formally requested that Trump withdraw the troops, writing that their deployment "seems intentionally designed to inflame the situation." "We didn't have a problem until Trump got involved," Newsom said in a June 8 X post. "This is a serious breach of state sovereignty – inflaming tensions while pulling resources from where they're actually needed." In response to a question about Newsom's criticism of Trump, Noem said that "if (Newsom) was doing his job, then people wouldn't have gotten hurt the last couple of days." "The president knows that (Newsom) makes bad decisions, and that's why the president chose the safety of this community over waiting for Governor Newsom to get some sanity," she said. "That's one of the reasons why these National Guard soldiers are being federalized, so they can use their special skill set to keep peace." Noem, though, previously threatened then-President Joe Biden when Democrats said he should federalize the National Guard in Texas in response to the state's anti-immigration efforts, USA TODAY reported. "If Joe Biden federalizes the National Guard, that would be a direct attack on states' rights," Noem said in an X post on Feb. 6, 2024, when she was still governor of South Dakota. In the CBS News interview, Noem also criticized Minnesota's response to the George Floyd protests in 2020. "We're not going to let a repeat of 2020 happen," she said. Noem, 53, began her political career in 2006 when she was elected to the South Dakota House of Representatives. She served two terms. In 2010, she successfully ran for South Dakota's lone seat in the U.S House of Representatives. Noem served four terms in the House before taking on another role: South Dakota's governor. She was elected as the state's first female governor in 2019. Noem was confirmed as Homeland Security secretary on Jan. 25. This article originally appeared on Sioux Falls Argus Leader: What did Kristi Noem say about the Los Angeles protests?
Yahoo
31 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump vs. California is the fight the White House wants
President Trump is getting the fight with California he wants as Democrats in the state criticize his decision to send the National Guard to Los Angeles without local approval to deal with protests surrounding raids by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The unfolding events hit at the heart of key issues that Trump basks in: immigration and fighting liberal California Democrats. You can also add in law and order, as Trump and his team accuse California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) and other local officials of being too soft on demonstrators destroying property and setting cars on fire. White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller on Sunday reposted several images meant to convey the chaos in LA, including one showing huge plumes of smoke billowing from a burning vehicle as demonstrators watched, with one with holding Mexican flag. The post read, 'Let's check in on how LAPD's management of the 'protests' is going,' and criticized Newsom's slamming of Trump's decision to send the guard. A second Miller repost was from his White House colleague Taylor Budowich, who sent out a similar video of a masked protestor on a car surrounded by other burning cars and demonstrators in the streets. 'Democrat management,' the post said. Newsom has said California will sue the Trump administration over its deployment of the National Guard, while the White House maintains Trump intervened at the right time to restore law and order and that the violent attacks had already escalated before he stepped in. 'Donald Trump has created the conditions you see on your TV tonight. He's exacerbated the conditions. He's, you know, lit the proverbial match. He's putting fuel on this fire, ever since he announced he was taking over the National Guard — an illegal act, an immoral act, an unconstitutional act,' Newsom said on MSNBC. Just a few days ago, Trump was battling negative coverage of his public feud with erstwhile ally Elon Musk. The violence in LA allowed him to rapidly shift gears and put much of the focus on immigration even as his team pushed Congress to pass his signature legislation — which had triggered the battle with Musk. 'The riots in Los Angeles prove that we desperately need more immigration enforcement personnel and resources. America must reverse the invasion unleashed by Joe Biden of millions of unvetted illegal aliens into our country,' White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said on the social platform X, calling for Senate passage of the House-passed 'one, big beautiful bill' with its funding measures for border security. The story even served to bring Musk back into the fold, with the tech mogul sending a number of supportive messages of the president that criticized Newsom and demonstrators. Trump ran on a platform of mass deportations. Since then, ICE raids, arrests of migrants at immigration courts and lawsuits over deportations have been a major part of his first few months in office. His administration has blamed Democrats, especially Biden, for allowing what they call an 'invasion' of migrants coming in at the nation's southern border, and White House briefings have often begun with spotlighting a deported migrant who committed a crime in the U.S. The images of masked demonstrators with Mexican flags falls right into this argument. That the protests are in California is also good for Trump. Trump has flirted with the idea of fining or nixing federal funding for the state, lashing out earlier this month after a transgender athlete was allowed to compete and win at a high school track and field meet. He also blamed Newsom, who is widely considered to be eying a presidential bid, for the wildfires that raged in the Los Angeles area in January and made his first trip as president to California to meet with him and survey damage. Newsom then visited Trump at the White House in February about aid for wildfire victims. The White House is now blaming Newsom for the protests in Los Angeles, bashing him for suing the administration instead of focusing on solutions. 'Gavin Newsom's feckless leadership is directly responsible for the lawless riots and violent attacks on law enforcement in Los Angeles. Instead of filing baseless lawsuits meant to score political points with his left-wing base, Newsom should focus on protecting Americans by restoring law and order to his state,' White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson said. Trump on Sunday didn't rule out using the Insurrection Act, which allows the president to deploy the military and federalize the National Guard in the event of an insurrection. He considered invoking the law in his first term during the 2020 protests over police brutality, but officials like former Defense Secretary Mark Esper pushed back at the time. 'We're going to have troops everywhere. We're not going to let this happen to our country. We're not going to let our country be torn apart like it was under Biden and his auto pen,' Trump said Sunday. The president also said that if California officials stand in the way of federal officials deporting migrants, they will face federal charges. 'We're just going to see what happens. If we think there's a serious insurrection … we're going to have law and order,' he said. California Democrats are responding to Trump by calling on residents to not turn to violence while protesting, arguing that the president's move to bring in the National Guard was meant to provoke the chaos. 'Angelenos — don't engage in violence and chaos. Don't give the administration what they want,' Mayor Karen Bass said on X. Similarly, Newsom warned other states about Trump federalizing the National Guard and accused him of escalating the situation. 'This is exactly what Donald Trump wanted,' Newsom said on X. 'He flamed the fires and illegally acted to federalize the National Guard. The order he signed doesn't just apply to CA. It will allow him to go into ANY STATE and do the same thing. We're suing him.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
31 minutes ago
- Yahoo
ActBlue fires back at GOP investigation, saying it appears unconstitutional and partisan
ActBlue is fighting back against a House Republican investigation into its workings, saying the probe appears to have become an unconstitutional abuse of power to help the White House. The Democratic online fundraising platform said Monday in a letter obtained by POLITICO that it was reevaluating whether to cooperate with the ongoing congressional investigation into fraud on its platform in light of President Donald Trump's executive action to investigate potential foreign contributions on ActBlue and House Republicans' public statements supporting the White House. 'If the Committees are now working to gather information on behalf of Department of Justice prosecutors, rather than for legitimate legislative purposes, that would fundamentally transform the nature of your investigation — and violate ActBlue's constitutional rights,' ActBlue's lawyers wrote in the letter Monday to GOP Reps. Jim Jordan, James Comer and Bryan Steil. The allegations are an escalation in the conflict between House Republicans and ActBlue, the behemoth Democratic fundraising platform that has long been in GOP crosshairs as it has helped the left build a massive fundraising advantage. ActBlue CEO Regina Wallace-Jones told POLITICO last month that ActBlue believes the platform has 'nothing to hide' but needs to better communicate its role in light of the attacks. In the letter, lawyers representing ActBlue ask the congressional committees investigating the platform to clarify the purpose of their work. They argue public statements from Jordan, Comer and Steil indicate they are seeking to help the Trump Justice Department's separate investigation into ActBlue, rather than carry out congressional oversight. And they note that the "selective focus" of the investigation does not appear to include WinRed, the GOP's primary online fundraising counterpart — and thus may be intended to hurt Democrats, not provide legitimate oversight of American elections. 'The Committees' selective focus on ActBlue also suggests that the investigation may be a partisan effort directed at harming political opponents rather than gathering facts to assist in lawmaking efforts,' the letter reads. 'Such an action would raise substantial First Amendment concerns.' Spokespeople for the GOP committees investigating ActBlue did not immediately respond to requests for comment Monday afternoon. A spokesperson for ActBlue also did not immediately comment. The letter comes as the Trump administration is also going after ActBlue. Trump signed a memorandum in April ordering Attorney General Pam Bondi to investigate the potential use of foreign 'straw' donations in online fundraising, citing concerns about foreign influence in elections based in part on the work of the GOP-led congressional committees. ActBlue was the only platform named in the order. The memorandum calls for Bondi to report back in 90 days, which would be late July. Under federal law, only U.S. citizens and green card holders can give to campaigns and political action committees. Republicans have long argued that ActBlue, which processed billions of dollars in donations for Democrats last year, is not strict enough in weeding out potential foreign contributions. ActBlue has countered that it has processes to catch illegal donation attempts and that similar challenges exist on other platforms, including WinRed. The platform's lawyers also suggested that ActBlue's further cooperation with the congressional probes could depend on the extent of the committees' work with the Justice Department. 'In light of your public statements, it is essential that we receive more information about your agreement to coordinate the Committees' activities with the Executive Branch, so that ActBlue may properly evaluate its ongoing efforts to cooperate with the Committees,' the platform's lawyers wrote. ActBlue previously turned over thousands of pages of internal documents to the committees, some voluntarily, and then later under subpoena. The committees released an interim report in April that cited cases of fraud identified in the ActBlue documents as a means to argue that the platform had an 'unserious' approach to fraud prevention.
