
Wyoming lawmakers seek to eliminate SIPA, again, in effort to simplify budget process
Efforts have been made in past legislative sessions to eliminate Wyoming's many financial 'coffee cans.'
In 2024, lawmakers successfully repealed the School Capital Construction Account and its related accounts. This year, the Legislature successfully eliminated the Budget Reserve Account (BRA) through Senate File 168 and nearly eliminated SIPA through the passage of SF 169.
However, Gov. Mark Gordon line-item vetoed SF 169 and kept SIPA online. The governor maintained his long-term support of simplifying the state's budget process, but he disapproved of the Legislature's approach in SF 169.
Gov. Mark Gordon
Gov. Mark Gordon
'(SIPA) was originally a compromise between a previous legislature and the then-serving governor,' Gordon wrote in his veto letter. He served as state treasurer in 2013, when SIPA was first created. 'The compromise recognized the value of the governor's authority to use some of the funds when making budget recommendations.'
Gordon argued the original structure of the bill limited his ability to make budget recommendations.
Currently, excess funds from the state's Permanent Mineral Trust Fund (PMTF) account are split evenly between SIPA and the state's main savings account (the Legislative Stabilization Reserve Account, or LSRA).
SF 169 originally eliminated SIPA by July 2026 and transferred all excess funds into the LSRA.
Wyoming statute prohibits the governor from proposing appropriations from LSRA in excess of the 5% statutory reserve account. In other words, he can't make budget recommendations from this account.
'It is a cagey strategy to undermine a long-standing compromise between the executive and legislative branches and breach the original intent of SIPA,' Gordon wrote.
One effect of Gordon's veto removed the split of funds flowing into SIPA and LSRA; now, all excess funds go directly into SIPA, effective immediately. He reasoned this action is necessary, as he expects the state will see greater pressure to fund public schools with the passage of more tax cuts and diversions, along with falling oil and natural gas prices.
'The combined effects of these factors create substantial pressure on the general fund to cover any school funding deficit and still meet the ongoing costs of government,' Gordon wrote, 'as well as provide services to Wyoming families and businesses.'
Impact of veto
During the Legislature's Select Committee on Capital Finance meeting on Thursday, lawmakers moved to draft a bill similar to SF 169 and, in a sense, make it 'veto-proof.' Sen. Larry Hicks, R-Baggs, who was the primary sponsor of SF 169, said Gordon's veto 'left … quite a dilemma here.'
'The net effect of this line-item veto, if we allow this to stay in statutes the way it currently is, it zeros out the reserve accounts,' Hicks said.
Sen. Larry Hicks, R-Baggs (2025)
Sen. Larry Hicks, R-Baggs
Legislative budget and fiscal staff provided a comparison of the two versions of the bill and their long-term fiscal impacts, based on numbers from the January long-term forecast of the state's fiscal profile.
The SIPA transfers 45% of what it retains to the School Foundation Program (SFP) account, the state's main spending account to fund public schools. If the SIPA is entirely repealed, the SFP loses that funding.
Before SF 169 was signed into law, the LSRA and SFP were estimated to receive $124.1 million and $369.4 million, respectively, from SIPA over a six-year forecast period. Under the version passed by the Legislature, LSRA was estimated to receive $191.6 million in that same time period.
The SFP would receive a total of $111.4 million in the first two fiscal years, and then not receive anything starting in fiscal year 2027 with the repeal of SIPA. Under Gordon's vetoes, the SFP is estimated to receive $470 million over the six-year forecast period, and the LSRA will receive no funding at all.
'But I want to point out that, starting in FY 28 the (PMTF) reserve account can't guarantee the full amount, and it falls short by about $60 million,' said LSO senior fiscal analyst Polly Scott. 'As Sen. Hicks did state … the estimate is that the reserve account is depleted somewhere in (fiscal year 2028).'
Under the version adopted by the Legislature, the reserve account's life is extended beyond the six-year forecast, Scott added, because the state is relying on it less.
Lawmakers respond
State Treasurer Curt Meier noted that the PMTF reserve account is acting the way the LSRA should act. He suggested removing the 1.25% guarantee from the PMTF reserve account into SIPA so it can 'function (as) what it was supposed to do.'
'You're spending money you don't have and then you're trying to catch up … so you can spend it in this year's legislative session,' Meier said. 'Let the reserve account stand on itself, rather than putting more pressure on it than what it can afford to bear.'
Then, the Legislature could move the unrealized capital gains into the LSRA, he said. The LSRA already provides $100 million to the school spending account once it drops below a certain threshold.
Sen. Tara Nethercott, R-Cheyenne (2025)
Sen. Tara Nethercott, R-Cheyenne
Chairwoman Sen. Tara Nethercott, R-Cheyenne, suggested also discussing lifting this cap from the LSRA into the SFP at the committee's next meeting in September. For now, committee members voted to draft a bill that eliminates the SIPA, with a provision to remove the 1.25% flow guarantee from the PMTF reserve account, and discuss it at the next meeting.
'The elimination of the SIPA account is important, I think, to the Legislature as a whole, in order to simplify and provide transparency to the budget process,' Nethercott said. 'Because the SIPA account has been butchered. It's been tortured ... and no longer serves its intended purpose, creating a transparency issue.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Boston Globe
5 hours ago
- Boston Globe
Mass. Governor: All shelters are closed, state of emergency for shelter system is over
Advertisement 'We're saving taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars and putting families on a path to self-sustainability,' she said. In addition to the closure of hotel shelters, shelters located at the former Bay State Correctional Center and the Chelsea Rapid Shelter site have also closed. Three families were using the hotel shelter system, a Massachusetts experienced a surge of immigrants arriving here beginning in the At the same time, the Advertisement After Healey took office in January 2023, officials drastically expanded the emergency shelter system to house thousands of homeless and migrant families For decades, homeless families have been guaranteed a roof over their heads under to help families at hotels access medical care, find transportation, and enroll their children in school. With costs skyrocketing, Healey and legislators repeatedly sought to tighten eligibility, including by requiring homeless families to prove lawful immigration status, show they have lived in Massachusetts for at least six months, and undergo The number of families in emergency shelter has fallen to Just last month, however, state officials had the cap set by the Legislature, the state still was not able to keep up with the demand. Healey officials say they issued the declaration specifically so they can continue to impose restrictions on shelters, such as limiting who gets priority for beds and how long they can stay. Advertisement Massachusetts Housing Secretary Ed Augustus wrote in The extended declaration is supposed to last until Nov. 9, which is required under rules set out by the Legislature in a 2023 spending bill. It can be extended again if Augustus determines it's necessary. Former MBTA executive Brian Shortsleeve, who is running in the GOP primary for governor, criticized Healey's comments Friday. He slammed the use of public dollars to fund the state's HomeBase program, which provides rental assistance for families transitioning into permanent housing and is credited with helping reduce the emergency shelter population. Shortsleeve said Healey's claim of saving taxpayer dollars has 'got to go done [sic] in the Guinness Book of Records as the biggest lie ever told by a politician,' 'As the next governor, I will stop the flow of our tax dollars to the migrants,' he said. Samantha J. Gross can be reached at


San Francisco Chronicle
5 hours ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Democrats cry foul as Republicans push to redraw Texas electoral maps to gain US House seats
AUSTIN, Texas (AP) — Democratic lawmakers tried to build a case Friday that Republicans in Texas have engineered a rushed and unfair process for redrawing the state's congressional districts in response to a push by President Donald Trump to win more GOP seats that Democrats fear will spread to other states. Democrats in the Republican-controlled Texas Legislature delayed the start of public testimony during a hearing of a state House Committee on Redistricting by peppering its chair with pointed questions about how quickly GOP lawmakers planned to move and whether the public is getting enough of an opportunity to weigh in. The Republican proposal would give the GOP five more winnable seats in next year's elections, which would make it easier for the party to keep its slim U.S. House majority. Chair Cody Vasut told the committee that he expected it to vote later Friday or Saturday on the bill, which Republicans unveiled Wednesday. He said he expected the full state House to debate the measure Tuesday. Republican Gov. Greg Abbott called the Legislature into a 30-day special session and put congressional redistricting on the agenda after Trump called for Texas to redraw lines that Republicans approved in 2021. Republicans hold 25 of the state's seats, to 13 for Democrats, and the plan would create 30 districts that Trump would have carried by at least 10 percentage points had they been in place in 2024. Democratic state Rep. Jon Rosenthal called the public redistricting hearings 'a sham.' The committee quietly released the plan after several public hearings that drew hours of public testimony and scrutiny from residents concerned about new maps they hadn't seen. 'Does the leadership of the state truly think the people of Texas are that stupid?' Rosenthal asked, to which Vasut did not reply. Democrats appear to have few ways to stop the GOP's plans. Some have talked about boycotting the special session to prevent either chamber or both from having a quorum to take action until the special session ends. But Abbott could call another. Republican state Rep. Todd Hunter, the bill's author, dismissed concerns about how quickly lawmakers are moving. He said they've have been discussing the possibility for months. 'Don't be surprised,' he said. 'The topic has been there.' Hunter acknowledged that the lines were being redrawn 'for partisan purposes,' which he said is allowed by the U.S. Supreme Court. He said a law firm was consulted as the map was being drawn. 'I'm telling you,' he said. 'I'm not beating around the bush.' Democrats argue that if Republicans succeed in redrawing the districts in Texas, Trump will push other states to redraw theirs before they'd normally do so, which would be in 2031 or 2032, after the next nationwide census. States are required to adjust the lines at least once every 10 years to keep the districts as equal in population as possible after population shifts. That's led Democrats in California and New York to consider redrawing their states' lines to help Democrats, though each state has an independent commission for drawing the lines. Texas might have no competitive districts Under the exiting lines, which were in place for the 2022 and 2024 elections, Republicans won all of the seats in districts carried by Trump by at least 10 percentage points, and Democrats won all 11 districts carried by Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris. In the other two districts, Trump won by less than 10 percentage points, but Democrats won the House seats. Under the new map, there would be no districts won by Trump by less than 10 points. In Austin, a liberal bastion, parts of two districts represented by Democrats would be combined into one that favored Democrats even more strongly. One of the three other districts would include a slice of the city and extend 340 miles (547 kilometers) to the west, to take in the oil city of Midland. 'Some people like it, and some people don't, and that's the nature of redistricting," Hunter said. ___ Hanna reported from Topeka, Kansas.


Hamilton Spectator
5 hours ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Democrats cry foul as Republicans push to redraw Texas electoral maps to gain US House seats
AUSTIN, Texas (AP) — Democratic lawmakers tried to build a case Friday that Republicans in Texas have engineered a rushed and unfair process for redrawing the state's congressional districts in response to a push by President Donald Trump to win more GOP seats that Democrats fear will spread to other states. Democrats in the Republican-controlled Texas Legislature delayed the start of public testimony during a hearing of a state House Committee on Redistricting by peppering its chair with pointed questions about how quickly GOP lawmakers planned to move and whether the public is getting enough of an opportunity to weigh in. The Republican proposal would give the GOP five more winnable seats in next year's elections, which would make it easier for the party to keep its slim U.S. House majority. Chair Cody Vasut told the committee that he expected it to vote later Friday or Saturday on the bill, which Republicans unveiled Wednesday. He said he expected the full state House to debate the measure Tuesday. Republican Gov. Greg Abbott called the Legislature into a 30-day special session and put congressional redistricting on the agenda after Trump called for Texas to redraw lines that Republicans approved in 2021. Republicans hold 25 of the state's seats, to 13 for Democrats, and the plan would create 30 districts that Trump would have carried by at least 10 percentage points had they been in place in 2024. Democratic state Rep. Jon Rosenthal called the public redistricting hearings 'a sham.' The committee quietly released the plan after several public hearings that drew hours of public testimony and scrutiny from residents concerned about new maps they hadn't seen. 'Does the leadership of the state truly think the people of Texas are that stupid?' Rosenthal asked, to which Vasut did not reply. GOP author acknowledges partisan motives Democrats appear to have few ways to stop the GOP's plans. Some have talked about boycotting the special session to prevent either chamber or both from having a quorum to take action until the special session ends. But Abbott could call another. Republican state Rep. Todd Hunter, the bill's author, dismissed concerns about how quickly lawmakers are moving. He said they've have been discussing the possibility for months. 'Don't be surprised,' he said. 'The topic has been there.' Hunter acknowledged that the lines were being redrawn 'for partisan purposes,' which he said is allowed by the U.S. Supreme Court. He said a law firm was consulted as the map was being drawn. 'I'm telling you,' he said. 'I'm not beating around the bush.' Democrats argue that if Republicans succeed in redrawing the districts in Texas, Trump will push other states to redraw theirs before they'd normally do so, which would be in 2031 or 2032, after the next nationwide census. States are required to adjust the lines at least once every 10 years to keep the districts as equal in population as possible after population shifts. That's led Democrats in California and New York to consider redrawing their states' lines to help Democrats, though each state has an independent commission for drawing the lines. Texas might have no competitive districts Under the exiting lines, which were in place for the 2022 and 2024 elections, Republicans won all of the seats in districts carried by Trump by at least 10 percentage points, and Democrats won all 11 districts carried by Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris. In the other two districts, Trump won by less than 10 percentage points, but Democrats won the House seats. Under the new map, there would be no districts won by Trump by less than 10 points. In Austin, a liberal bastion, parts of two districts represented by Democrats would be combined into one that favored Democrats even more strongly. One of the three other districts would include a slice of the city and extend 340 miles (547 kilometers) to the west, to take in the oil city of Midland. Vault refused to recognize Democrats so they could force the committee to vote on adding more public hearings in cities affected by the new maps. Data compiled by the Legislature shows that the proposed map would pack more Democratic voters into fewer districts while spreading Republicans out a bit more. Hunter said there's no requirement to do redistricting at a certain time. 'Some people like it, and some people don't, and that's the nature of redistricting,' Hunter said. ___ Hanna reported from Topeka, Kansas. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .