[{"_1":2,"_112":-5,"_113":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88,100],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6361375,"mediaKeyId","2170708-d92b4b1e04a6e998c3672fcd06f20cf4","parentId",2170708,"title","Votes at a glance: January 29 Wyoming Senate actions (consent and key floor bills)","audioSeconds",6612,"startMs",239000,"endMs",6851000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2170708-d92b4b1e04a6e998c3672fcd06f20cf4&start=239&end=6851","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2170708-d92b4b1e04a6e998c3672fcd06f20cf4/thumbnail_239000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6361375/Wyoming/Votes-at-a-glance-January-29-Wyoming-Senate-actions-consent-and-key-floor-bills","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6361375-d7134355aeb5eabb130b7229170f166d/orig.mp4?Expires=1775951726&Signature=KrQnzBDENtbfT4a7YH2IlbsIgNW3TfHCw~sX9iEUY0tGWSXKNWVLkcuJNA9sdnE9XxYZYshDeLOqZsNrhZnwnCFrZp4YywZEKJg7~rw5mbUv6Oak~WWYI~TExCmuzVw9bgTHv47xCJM-Ted~5o-ptcxG0QDqO-R1Qb~e7Se8tN-dZfGnG85qbAZqqTV-n96gNGLnLjpv5x8e~6BkBOJrOAapWPK57G6sSVJ2io0priF59UGUwqk0tyTkdI0Ry6RhqMW1IEYc9tiYuAZPAzseMAZ59mESRn~BAxj~8lrptRzZZg46MEb03ogaktba14rICCnwSQR0IAT6fvCaxwXe1Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Wyoming Legislature","date","2025-01-29T00:00:00Z","article","The Wyoming Senate recorded final action on a number of bills during its Jan. 29 session. Below is a concise summary of votes and procedural outcomes taken on the floor that day.

Passed on the consent/3rd-reading consent list (voice/roll calls as recorded):
- Senate File 17 — Carbon dioxide enhanced oil recovery stimulus — passed the Senate (consent list; recorded as passed).
- Senate File 39 — Automatic transfer of automobile title upon death — passed the Senate (consent list).
- Senate File 78 — Prohibition on distribution of unsolicited ballot forms — passed the Senate (consent list).
- Senate File 84 — Country of origin labeling, USA Beef — passed the Senate (consent list).
- Senate Joint Resolution 3 — Commemorating Nellie Tayloe Ross — passed the Senate (consent list).

Major bills debated and final outcomes:
- Senate File 42 (Resort hotel liquor licenses) — Passed on third reading after divided amendments; final recorded Senate vote: 23 ayes, 5 no, 3 conflicts.
- Senate File 60 (Sales and use tax distribution rates) — Passed on third reading after the Senate deleted earlier large third‑reading amendments and restored the bill to its original text; final recorded Senate vote: 30 ayes, 0 no, 1 excused.
- Senate File 62 (Restrooms in publicly funded schools, including locker-room exception for coed teams) — Passed on third reading after adoption of a targeted amendment; final recorded Senate vote: 27 ayes, 3 no, 1 excused.

Other procedural actions:
- The Senate voted to suspend rules and number bill draft 25LSO-0783V1.1 (Wyoming Generational Investment Account 2) after a two-thirds roll-call (ayes 30, excused 1); the draft will receive a bill number and proceed through introduction procedures.

What the results mean: On bills that passed third reading, enrolled copies will reflect adopted floor amendments and the House or governor consideration will follow standard legislative processes. Several items saw substantial floor amendment activity; stakeholders should consult the enrolled bill texts for final statutory language and effective dates.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Senate Floor Session-Day 12, January 29, 2025-AM","oneSentenceSummary","A quick summary of final outcomes for bills and motions taken on Jan. 29 in the Wyoming Senate, including consent-list measures and major bills that drew floor debate and roll-call votes.","taxTitle","Senate, Committees, Legislative, Wyoming","taxId",30485,"location","Wyoming","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6361382,"Senate passes bill clarifying locker-room access for coed teams and student privacy",751,5782000,6533000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2170708-d92b4b1e04a6e998c3672fcd06f20cf4&start=5782&end=6533","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2170708-d92b4b1e04a6e998c3672fcd06f20cf4/thumbnail_5782000.jpg","/articles/6361382/Wyoming/Senate-passes-bill-clarifying-locker-room-access-for-coed-teams-and-student-privacy","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6361382-3ad51b6906a3c08cf979a632df89adc7/orig.mp4?Expires=1775951726&Signature=JHch~F-YAJf0U~36o8BWaOua6TamHeqpOV13wKhSZRno9Q~PwpLoyTpwSRMZjTdTH2i59Y5zQHcPM-TZ07k49oCIhsSbTg4J7t-1ynzYJNqvDPjUJmwmol55u0ph8LGcEHc7NMkBhf2ggxQEnhglou9K0dyckvIn1XpWqw~DZleVV9lOnnqu9hqLSKqA-uM6ZS6p4-~3A9Mf3mjyzGO7zpc-2dZhEsAJRIpgaV3WlgTqMlf-MSxRsPPiYjHF0wRJXYAmaY4PxSABng9VgvaXbv6sp97HMMvVOGi1eigQNnyO0u12CdMK4UMeDu9ta7tPwm6UP3dgjT1YZMHhAEQpQg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Senate File 62, a bill addressing restrooms and locker-room access in publicly funded schools, passed the Wyoming Senate on Jan. 29 after adoption of a narrow, technical amendment to cover coed athletic teams.

Senator Schuler moved 3rd-reading Amendment No. 1 to address an issue a senator raised involving a coed team that had access to only a single locker room. The amendment permits a coach of a school-sponsored athletic activity with both male and female members to enter a locker room before, during or after the activity when no suitable meeting room is available, provided all students are fully clothed. When possible, the coach is required to be accompanied by at least one additional adult who is not a high-school student; that additional adult is not required if members of both sexes are present in the locker room.

Proponents said the amendment was a straightforward fix to an unanticipated local circumstance and would provide necessary clarity for small or remote districts that may lack alternate meeting space. “This is a simple fix,” the amendment mover said on the floor. Opponents urged deference to local control but acknowledged the amendment addressed specific, practical circumstances in some districts.

The amendment was adopted, and Senate File 62 passed third reading by roll call, recorded as 27 ayes, 3 no and 1 excused. Supporters said the bill will help districts with limited facilities avoid last-minute litigation and create an operational standard that protects student privacy while allowing necessary supervision. Detractors reiterated a preference for local board control over operational details.

The Senate’s passage advances the bill; implementation and any administrative guidance will rely on district policies and any follow-up guidance from the state education agencies.","Senate File 62, which updates rules on restroom and locker-room access in publicly funded schools and adds a narrowly tailored exception for coed athletic teams when no other suitable meeting space exists, passed the Senate after a brief amendment adding the exception.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6361386,"Senate restores original sales-tax distribution bill after floor fight; file 60 passes",2504,3261000,5765000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2170708-d92b4b1e04a6e998c3672fcd06f20cf4&start=3261&end=5765","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2170708-d92b4b1e04a6e998c3672fcd06f20cf4/thumbnail_3261000.jpg","/articles/6361386/Wyoming/Senate-restores-original-sales-tax-distribution-bill-after-floor-fight-file-60-passes","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6361386-e56a422e0dab62f497a244f1764bf9e7/orig.mp4?Expires=1775951726&Signature=B5T2c2VyWWE0S-txfUmB9lc6JtWPnmcJwcAq8APEvlauu8liuYdkwL691EAgH6TKBT6s3lTfv0u4qBK0eEZyOfVtNXlVgF5HrF-DgIcQNh7VyrP899Yh9UKxW3k8F8O-SRJF50MaWDipOVkQy7lTtHQK09wIQKrO4MNyhnU-f9JcaqQTZt9VofuTWJu5l2XIXUSXQZFsOpoaZu8XEE2JmViaLHQ~-FcEGz2Grck-e6hikLJOx1FT0b~7prLjUGcB5-BcOMALDa96XPiPzD5fzoPXZjVlczqllfAYTh6DOidMkUdiwiaMpG-v9Zw~yeQL~JayWmnR-TlV58Rwaqwvpg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Senators debated and then approved Senate File 60 — a bill addressing sales and use tax distribution — after a complex sequence of third-reading amendments and roll-call votes on Jan. 29.

The measure’s floor history began with a major 3rd-reading amendment offered by Senator Hicks that would have captured roughly the first $73 million (figures cited on the floor varied between $73M and $76M) of sales and used that pool to fund a statutorily specified local distribution formula and hardship allocations. Supporters of that amendment said it would provide predictable, recurring funding for cities, towns and counties; opponents said the amendment had grown the bill well beyond the sponsor’s original intent and raised constitutional and fiscal concerns.

After extended floor debate, multiple senators proposed and voted on additional changes: Senator Scott offered a 3rd-reading amendment to delay the bill’s effective date by one year to allow the Legislature to review the proposal during the budget session; Senator French later offered a 3rd-reading amendment to delete the Hicks second-reading amendment (and the Scott delay amendment) and return the bill to its prior, original text. The Senate adopted French’s motion to delete the prior amendments and thereby restored the bill to the sponsor’s original form.

Following the sequence of amendments and deletions, the Senate passed Senate File 60 on third reading by a roll-call vote of 30 ayes, 0 no, 1 excused (final record: \"30 I, 1 excused\").

Floor discussion included technical and policy arguments. Senator Hicks described the adopted (then later-deleted) amendment as a way to “capture the first $73,000,000 of sales and use taxes” and feed a local government distribution account, using “the exact same formula” the Legislature has used for prior distributions (one-third to counties; two-thirds to cities and towns, with a hardship subcomponent). Senator Rothfuss and others said a prior second-reading amendment had already made the bill significantly larger in fiscal scope (floor references ranged up to roughly $190 million in added shifts), and they described the adopted-to-then-deleted 3rd-reading language as an attempt to mitigate negative effects on small communities.

Opponents repeatedly urged a slower, more deliberative approach — including referral to an interim study — before making broad changes to the state’s tax distribution system. Supporters of amendment-based adjustments argued the changes would shield smaller towns and counties from sudden revenue shifts and provide a predictable distribution mechanism.

After French’s motion to delete the large amendments was adopted, the body again debated and then approved the bill in its restored original form. The Senate’s passage sends the bill forward; fiscal and implementation details will be finalized in the enrolled copy and, if necessary, in subsequent House action.

Key procedural notes: Senate File 60 was the subject of at least three 3rd-reading amendments on the floor (3rd-reading Amendment No. 2 by Senator Hicks; 3rd-reading Amendment No. 1 by Senator Scott to delay enactment; and 3rd-reading Amendment No. 3 by Senator French to delete the prior amendments). The Senate ultimately adopted Amendment No. 3 (which deleted earlier amendments) and passed the bill by 30 ayes to 0 no with 1 excused.","Senate File 60 (sales and use tax distribution) passed the Senate after a sequence of major floor amendments, a delay amendment and a final motion that returned the bill to its original text. Lawmakers debated distribution formulas, hardship protections for small towns and the scale of the revenue shift.",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":105,"_47":106,"_49":107,"_51":108,"_53":109,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":110,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":111,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6361391,"Senate approves resort-hotel liquor license bill after months-long amendments fight",2137,1105000,3242000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2170708-d92b4b1e04a6e998c3672fcd06f20cf4&start=1105&end=3242","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2170708-d92b4b1e04a6e998c3672fcd06f20cf4/thumbnail_1105000.jpg","/articles/6361391/Wyoming/Senate-approves-resort-hotel-liquor-license-bill-after-months-long-amendments-fight","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6361391-7c95908bb093885827ea682072a4296b/orig.mp4?Expires=1775951726&Signature=aXumF1hCQ7lgP1W-dHWtPXnHUaiim6jrL~Lngwz8gPn2U9db9w4Q~upAmmDJ4W6H5aX1lZAY5C-D08moqeVsG5PKUr1vV0A01AB9eL2wn7BC8dcbErtapJpDGKlfHP0IHxFfJX21v2vpi17iBj~emf~D44eywDuEl3NH1qYoOgKJePaCIFLCtNR7bDRXrDKg6CVpT4LyIWFgV~ycfIymCDoFGNtxoO1Eup5HYtsSGdERyYWCOs0BEOZn3DeZD7oUTywkCw0VTOwE8B78rQkdbQIVibPMTx-yBJQWAlFNSYTPH1XtSbDC0VLSw1dq6edWP-gq83Ca1hZrSUH3pP0x3Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Senate File 42, a measure to expand eligibility for resort-hotel liquor licenses, passed the Wyoming Senate on Jan. 29 after extended floor debate and a series of divided amendments.

The bill, as carried on third reading, won final passage in the Senate by a recorded vote of 23 ayes, 5 no and 3 conflicts. The session’s debate centered on a three-part amendment that sought to: (1) require certain meeting-room and proximity conditions, including a five-mile rule outside city limits; (2) lower the project investment threshold from $10,000,000 to $5,000,000; and (3) reduce the minimum room count from 35 to 20.

The sponsor of the 3rd-reading amendment, identified in debate as Senator Gru, told colleagues the intent was to “lower the bar so more people can have an economic opportunity to provide malt beverage, liquors at their resorts,” and to help remote properties become eligible. He said the measures were aimed at expanding economic opportunity for small “boutique” resorts that are remote from town.

Opponents pressed several concerns. Senator Hicks called one proposed definition “a fencing amendment,” arguing it would “fence everybody out of a hotel liquor license” by sharply narrowing what qualifies as a restaurant and by imposing prescriptive requirements such as printed menus, long operating hours and what kinds of food qualify. “If you don’t have those on the menu...you can’t participate,” Hicks said, adding that the proposal would impose unrealistic operational expectations on seasonal or otherwise small operators. Senator Case declared a conflict on the bill.

The three divisions of the principal amendment were taken separately. Division 2, lowering the investment threshold to $5 million, was adopted. Division 3, reducing the room count from 35 to 20, was also adopted. Division 1, which tied together the five-mile rule and meeting-room size provisions, failed.

A later, separate site-definition amendment that would have added a prescriptive definition of “full-service restaurant” (including minimum hours of operation and printed menus) failed after floor debate in which senators argued it would exclude common, existing businesses and invite unintended consequences. Opponents gave multiple examples — such as seasonal restaurants, conference-center dining that operates only during events, and food trucks — to press that the amendment would be overbroad.

Senators who supported the prescriptive language said it was intended to prevent gaming the program and to ensure that resort liquor licenses go to bona fide full-service businesses rather than to minimal food operations or convenience outlets. “This amendment just provides a prescription so the liquor division knows that a restaurant is a full-service restaurant,” the amendment sponsor said.

After votes on the divided amendment and the failed prescriptive definition, the Senate returned to the underlying bill and approved it on third reading. Voting records show the final tally as 23 ayes, 5 no and 3 conflicts; several senators recorded conflicts during the roll call.

The bill’s supporters argued it would stimulate rural economic development, giving remote lodgings a new revenue option. Detractors warned that overly prescriptive definitions or arbitrary distance requirements could produce unintended harm to small communities and seasonal businesses.

With the Senate’s passage, the bill will be transmitted to the House or to the governor as the legislative calendar requires, with the precise effective date and any engrossed changes to be confirmed in the bill text on the enrolled copy.

Votes at a glance: On the principal motions reported on the floor, Division 2 and Division 3 of 3rd-reading Amendment No. 1 were adopted; Division 1 failed. 3rd-reading Amendment No. 2 (the prescriptive restaurant definition) failed. Final passage: 23 ayes, 5 no, 3 conflicts.","The Wyoming Senate passed Senate File 42, overhaul of resort-hotel liquor licenses, after floor amendments that split lawmakers over tighter restaurant definitions, a five-mile rule and investment and room-count thresholds. Key changes proposed in a divided amendment failed while two other divisions were adopted.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Votes at a glance: January 29 Wyoming Senate actions (consent and key floor bills)

Senate passes bill clarifying locker-room access for coed teams and student privacy

Senate restores original sales-tax distribution bill after floor fight; file 60 passes

Senate approves resort-hotel liquor license bill after months-long amendments fight