Lawmakers and citizens press Wyoming Business Council on scope and transparency of Business Ready Communities program

Members of the Joint Appropriations Committee pressed the Wyoming Business Council’s representatives on whether the Business Ready Communities (BRC) program has strayed from its original public-infrastructure purpose and whether its rules and funding should be tightened.

The session’s most direct critique came from Shane Victorin, a Fremont County resident testifying in public comment, who said statutory language allowing funding for “buildings” and “other infrastructure determined by the council” has enabled scope creep. He argued the combination of broad discretionary authority and continuously appropriated funds risks directing public dollars to private interests and urged the legislature to define “buildings,” narrow the “other infrastructure” clause, and end the continuous-appropriation treatment so the legislature revisits funding regularly.

Vicotrin said, according to the statutory text he cited, that the council’s discretion now “effectively hands authority to define the program scope to the council” and asked the committee whether policymakers preferred a tightly defined infrastructure program or a broadly discretionary funding mechanism. His testimony raised constitutional concerns under Wyoming’s anti‑donation clause when public spending primarily benefits private entities.

Not all witnesses agreed that the program should be curtailed. Joel Highsmith, mayor of Shoshone, described a proposed regional cardiopulmonary center that, he said, would not proceed “without the BRC loan.” Highsmith told the committee a $6 million BRC package—half loan, half low-interest grant—would make a regional health-care project feasible and yield nine higher-paying local jobs.

An airport and economic-development coalition perspective came from Devin Brubaker, airport director in Rock Springs, who told the committee that state-level coordination and expertise are essential to deliver infrastructure and ensure projects align with broader economic strategy.

Agency officials defended the council’s role as putting funding tools in service of community-identified needs. An agency official told the panel the BRC program is not a top‑down picker of winners: “We let local control determine … what are the barriers for growth that you have? … the communities pick themselves to work on a barrier to growth, and we help assist in potentially funding the removal of that barrier.” The official emphasized BRC is demand-driven and said selection flows from local readiness and applications rather than an explicit, central selection of certain towns.

Committee members asked for clarity about how the program is administered and how funds are tracked. The chair acknowledged the range of testimony and said the committee intends to consider reforms that preserve tools for local project delivery while increasing oversight and transparency—referencing interest among members in consensus block grants as a complementary or alternative vehicle for infrastructure funding.

What happens next: the committee said it will use the public testimony and written materials to evaluate statutory revisions and implementation changes, including more detailed public reporting on project documents and clearer legal definitions to prevent perceived mission creep.

Speakers quoted: Shane Victorin (Fremont County resident) and Joel Highsmith (Mayor, Shoshone) in public comment, and an agency official representing the Business Council during committee Q&A.

Ending: The committee adjourned for the evening with no vote; members said further interim work will consider whether to preserve BRC with new guardrails, expand county consensus grants, or both.