This November, the people of Wyoming will decide whether or not to reduce residential property taxes by 50%.

Opinion

At the heart of this decision is whether we want to assume the risks associated with fewer of the services property taxes currently cover. “Assuming the risk” is not about self-reliance since the services impacted absolutely require pooled resources, not individual effort. The risk is less safety for your family on roads, less fire protection, fewer first responders and law enforcement, and less aid in distress. 

Here is some context about property taxes. Eighteen of our 23 counties currently do not collect enough property tax to self-fund schools, and all counties and towns fall short of self-funding operations. The Wyoming Legislature currently fills the gap with other statewide revenue sources. That is why we don’t already notice disruption of services due to the lack of property taxes. Can those backup plans also cover a tax cut so that there is no loss of services? This is a blind spot and part of the overall risk. Proposition 1 ignores this risk — a real deal breaker.

The backup revenue streams are highly volatile. Sales taxes, mineral severance taxes, federal mineral royalties and investment income, which represent the other major revenue sources working alongside and in support of property taxes, are all affected by factors beyond our control and often beyond our borders. 

We can’t guarantee severance taxes by forcing energy companies to drill. We can’t rely on the federal government’s commitment to leasing federal lands for exploration of minerals, providing the state with federal mineral royalties. We can’t predict the future success of the stock market to safeguard Wyoming’s investment income.

What we can control is paying property taxes and contributing to sales tax revenue, the only general revenue sources that look like “self-reliance.” If we give ourselves a tax cut, it increases our dependence on other revenue sources, weakens our core value of self-determination and increases the risk of losing our status as a modern rural state. 

A “no” vote on Proposition 1 means we know the importance of taking a personal stake in the future of Wyoming through pooled resources. A “no” vote shows our continued support for the value of small communities which depend on receiving a share of property taxes from higher property-value counties. It is one of our great historical achievements that rugged individualism and shared community values, self-interest and altruism, exist together in a dynamic balance. As a result, we have avoided the downward spiral of many rural areas around the country. We still have livable towns and cities and real tangible economic value in our communities, our businesses and our homes. Proposition 1 puts our modern rural state and personal properties at risk of systemic devaluation, a self-inflicted wound. 

Self-reliance and self-determination in Wyoming include shared responsibilities to uphold our communities and neighbors in our “one community with long streets.” It’s the Wyoming Way.

Jerry Obermueller is a retired certified public accountant and former state representative for District 56 in Natrona County. He is treasurer of the Vote NO on Proposition #1 Committee.

Join the Conversation

5 Comments

WyoFile's goal is to provide readers with information and ideas that foster constructive conversations about the issues and opportunities our communities face. One small piece of how we do that is by offering a space below each story for readers to share perspectives, experiences and insights. For this to work, we need your help.

What we're looking for: 

  • Your real name — first and last. 
  • Direct responses to the article. Tell us how your experience relates to the story.
  • The truth. Share factual information that adds context to the reporting.
  • Thoughtful answers to questions raised by the reporting or other commenters.
  • Tips that could advance our reporting on the topic.
  • No more than three comments per story, including replies. 

What we block from our comments section, when we see it:

  • Pseudonyms. WyoFile stands behind everything we publish, and we expect commenters to do the same by using their real name.
  • Comments that are not directly relevant to the article. 
  • Demonstrably false claims, what-about-isms, references to debunked lines of rhetoric, professional political talking points or links to sites trafficking in misinformation.
  • Personal attacks, profanity, discriminatory language or threats.
  • Arguments with other commenters.

Other important things to know: 

  • Appearing in WyoFile’s comments section is a privilege, not a right or entitlement. 
  • We’re a small team and our first priority is reporting. Depending on what’s going on, comments may be moderated 24 to 48 hours from when they’re submitted — or even later. If you comment in the evening or on the weekend, please be patient. We’ll get to it when we’re back in the office.
  • We’re not interested in managing squeaky wheels, and even if we wanted to, we don't have time to address every single commenter’s grievance. 
  • Try as we might, we will make mistakes. We’ll fail to catch aliases, mistakenly allow folks to exceed the comment limit and occasionally miss false statements. If that’s going to upset you, it’s probably best to just stick with our journalism and avoid the comments section.
  • We don’t mediate disputes between commenters. If you have concerns about another commenter, please don’t bring them to us.

The bottom line:

If you repeatedly push the boundaries, make unreasonable demands, get caught lying or generally cause trouble, we will stop approving your comments — maybe forever. Such moderation decisions are not negotiable or subject to explanation. If civil and constructive conversation is not your goal, then our comments section is not for you. 

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  1. Thank you Jerry Obermueller for stating the obvioius. Follow who will benifit most from this ill conceived plan. The wealthiest home owners in Wyoming in Jackson and the Wapiti Valley are the ones pushing this. Who was on the House floor handing out checks to the members who pushed through the 25% cut and Proposition One. It was a Jackson Hole resident paying for votes to benifit her neighbors. If you own a 25 million dollar home in Teton county this is a substantial tax savings, compared to a $200,000 home in Converse County. There is no plan to make up this revenue to the counties, so what are the counties going to do to pay for law inforcement, road maintainance, sewers, municiple water and emergency services? Increase sales tax? Add sales tax to groceries, services and agriculture products? These are regressive taxes which means the lower income earners pay a higher proportion of their income on taxes compared to wealthy home owners. We will also see higher fees for sewage, municiple water and garbage pickup, which again are regressive taxes. If you rent where you live this will hurt you the most, as you do not pay property tax, but you will have to make up the difference by paying higher sales taxes and municiple fees. The weathly property owners are the grifters here. As usual they want middle and lower income families to pay their taxes so they get a free ride. There are much better solutions for solving these problem, such as more targeted tax relief as in tax relief for long term and retired home owners, and luxury taxes for homes over 4,000 sqft, which would make up the difference.

  2. Residents say VOTE YES on Prop 1.
    The political grifters behind the ‘Vote No on Prop 1 Committee’ and their commercials can’t handle the idea of fiscal responsibility.
    Maybe they can quit giving ridiculous tax breaks to mega corporations and data centers, that are stripping our resources, instead of trying to leach off taxes from the hard working residents.

    1. Mr. Olson, the real spending problem is on the National level. Do we need a grand ballroom or an arch dedicated to a president? I believe that our elected officials in Wyoming make better choices before they spend our money.
      I will be voting against Prop 1