Wyoming committee deadlocks on bill to require elections for stormwater utilities
Loading...
Summary
After lengthy public comment and legal debate over whether Title 15 utilities or Title 16 elections control stormwater funding, the Select Water Committee failed to advance 26LSO0289 on a 6–6 vote; the sponsor’s amendment clarifying an election requirement had carried but did not resolve members’ concerns about litigation and retroactivity.
Lawmakers and municipal officials sparred over a bill that would require voter approval for some municipal stormwater programs, but the Select Water Committee ultimately did not advance the measure.
Public testimony at the committee’s session focused on whether municipal stormwater fees are a utility rate that cities can adopt under Title 15, or whether they must be approved by voters under Title 16. Pat Crank, who testified in support of the bill, offered amendment language to replace references to the Surface Water Drainage Utility Act with an explicit election requirement under W.S. 16-10-105. "The proposed amendment would ... read ... the diversion or management of surface water runoff after an election under W.S. 16-10-105," he told the committee.
Property owners from Cheyenne and Laramie urged voter control. Brian Terrell said Cheyenne has repeatedly rejected similar measures and questioned the scale of the proposed program, noting an estimated $6,000,000 per year and claiming an ask of about $660,000,000 over 10 years. Brett Glass of Laramie called the city’s approach "a tax," arguing any fee assessed based on property characteristics should require voter approval.
Municipal leaders pressed back. Mayor Matt Murdock, president of the Wyoming Association of Municipalities, told the committee that the 2020 amendment placing stormwater utilities in Title 15 allowed cities to set service‑based rates subject to council process, audits and budget transparency. "Fees are not taxes," he said, and he warned that retroactively recategorizing those fees as taxes would create legal and financial instability for municipalities that relied on existing law.
Committee debate turned on statutory construction and the risk that the bill would either nullify the 2020 Title 15 framework or leave communities exposed to litigation. Several members urged interim study; Representative Chestyck moved to table the bill on that basis, but the motion failed. The sponsor then successfully moved to insert the amendment proposed by Mr. Crank, but that change did not settle the larger constitutional and policy questions many members raised.
On the roll call, the committee recorded a 6–6 tie, and the measure failed to advance. Chair said the issue would be appropriate for further work in the Select Water Committee interim discussions. The committee recorded no final votes on the measure that would send it to the floor.
Next steps: members signaled interest in continued study and refinement of statutory language to reconcile Title 15 and Title 16 responsibilities and to avoid destabilizing utilities already adopted under existing law.
