Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Digital Asset Authority topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee reviews draft to create Wyoming Digital Asset Authority; members debate board makeup and oversight
Summary
LSO staff presented bill draft 27 LSO 10 to create a Wyoming Digital Asset Authority with an eight‑member board and broad powers (issuance/custody of government digital assets). Committee members debated whether to subsume the Stable Token Commission, board size, appointment/confirmation methods and funding needs.
Legislative staff gave an in‑depth walkthrough on July 14 of bill draft 27 LSO 10, which would create a Wyoming Digital Asset Authority to coordinate state digital asset work, oversee issuance and custody of government digital assets, and administer digital identity and payment infrastructure.
Talise Hanson, legislative attorney with LSO, said the draft creates a new chapter and an eight‑member board composed of four members appointed by elected officials (subject to Senate confirmation) plus four subject‑matter experts appointed by the initial four. The draft would vest broad powers in the authority, including issuing and managing government‑issued digital assets (asset‑backed tokens, yield‑generating tokens), custody arrangements, rulemaking, intergovernmental agreements and procurement authority — while explicitly prohibiting the authority from issuing Wyoming stable tokens (those remain under the Wyoming Stable Token Commission).
Why it matters: staff notes and commissioners flagged potential risks from overlapping authority, blurred functional boundaries between the authority and the Stable Token Commission, fiduciary gaps in custody standards, and funding needs to execute the authority’s broad mandate. Committee members discussed three structural options: keep both entities with clear boundaries, subsume the commission into the authority, or transition the commission into the single authority with divisions for stable tokens, custody, real‑world assets and digital identity.
Committee debate focused on appointments and oversight. Senator Crago and others asked whether the Senate confirmation language had precedent when appointments are made by officials other than the governor; LSO staff cited the Investment Funds Committee process and selection panel examples and said they would research confirmation precedents. Several members argued for a smaller, subject‑matter expert majority board selected through an application or selection panel, with legislative confirmation as a public check.
Next steps and procedural note: the committee did not take action; members signaled they would continue work through the interim, gather public comment, and consider editing the draft to resolve composition, reporting and funding questions prior to future deliberations.
