Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bill to curb 'natural asset companies' stalls after property-rights concerns
Summary
House Bill 93, aimed at restricting certain 'natural asset companies' from monetizing land-based credits in Wyoming, failed a roll-call vote in the Committee of the Whole after senators raised property-rights and drafting concerns.
House Bill 93, titled in committee as a measure to limit certain transactions by “natural asset companies,” failed a recorded roll-call vote in the Committee of the Whole on Feb. 14, 2025 after a lengthy floor debate over property rights, scope and enforceability.
Proponents described the measure as protecting Wyoming’s multiple-use public lands and preventing outside entities from monetizing conservation or ecosystem credits in ways that could remove land from production. Senator Eyde, speaking for the bill in committee, said the intent was to prevent national or foreign entities from effectively taking western lands “out of production” by monetizing ecosystem credits.
Opponents warned the measure as drafted risked infringing private property rights and might be overly broad. Senator Rothfuss said the bill “seems to go a lot further beyond just foreign adversaries” and questioned whether restricting the creation, securitization or sale of credits would constitute a taking. Senator Driscoll expressed strong opposition on property-rights grounds, saying landowners should have the ability to determine how to value or monetize their property.
Senators also raised drafting concerns about enforcement mechanisms and the bill’s territorial reach: several members noted a company could attempt to avoid the restriction by bundling Wyoming land with out-of-state acreage. Senator Scott said the measure “isn’t very well drafted” and flagged the potential for sellers’ deals to be held invalid or for the state to rely on injunctive relief.
The Committee of the Whole recorded a roll-call result of 11 ayes and 20 noes; pursuant to Senate rules, House Bill 93 was deemed indefinitely postponed. Debate underscored tensions between protecting public multiple-use values and safeguarding private-property transaction rights.
Notes: The transcript shows substantive floor debate, multiple requests for clarifying language and a final roll-call of 11–20 against the bill.
