Fwd: Constitutional Amendments for Voter Guide by J. Knight, LWV

Three proposed amendments to the Wyoming Constitution are on the 2006 ballot. As a service, the LWV of Wyoming has provided these explanations and statements by supporters and opponents. Remember that an amendment requires majority approval by all people who vote in the election. If you don’t vote for an amendment, the non-vote counts against the amendment, just as a “no” vote would.

Article 15, Section 19. Mineral excise tax; distribution. Adoption of this amendment could clarify that all money deposited in the Permanent Wyoming Mineral Trust Fund are inviolate permanent funds of the state. Presently the Wyoming Constitution requires that 1.5 percent of mineral severance taxes be deposited in the PWMTF and these are “inviolate”. But if the legislature puts additional money in that fund, above the l.5 percent, the Constitution does not clearly say that money is inviolate as well.

Pro Amendment A: The PWMTF is a consistent source of state income. As energy booms come and go, the permanent fund continues to produce interest income. The more the Legislature puts in the trust fund during good times, the less chance of a tax increase in lean times. Why permanent? Otherwise, when energy-related income slows down, future legislators are likely to use the money to fund state programs. That would undermine the consistent interest income from the fund. (By House Speaker Randall Luthi, R-Freedom)

Con Amendment A: The Legislature already treats the deposits it makes to the PWMTF as permanent. Do we need to amend the Constitution to keep the current policy in place? Beyond that, Wyoming residents should consider if they want to put the additional deposits off-limits forever. There may come a day when the Legislature will need that money to operate government, by withdrawing it or using it as collateral and security for critical state needs. If this amendment passes and Wyoming faces a genuine dire emergency, the Legislature may have to cut government services drastically or raise taxes. Changing the Constitution to prevent future legislative action could have long-term, unknown consequences. (By State Sen. Jayne Mockler, D-Cheyenne)

Article 15, Section 17. County levy for support and maintenance of public schools. Adoption of this amendment would repeal the current limitation on the amount of property tax revenues that may be redistributed by the state through the School Foundation Program Account from school districts with greater property tax revenues to other school districts in the state. Every school district is required to collect 6 mills in property tax for education. Wealthy districts put a certain proportion of their revenue into a statewide fund that supports other districts. Currently the Constitution lets wealthy districts keep the surplus that exceeds what they must share. As a result, some districts are retaining surpluses that far exceed the amount guaranteed by the funding formula. Voters defeated an amendment similar to this in 2004.

Pro Amendment B: The Wyoming Supreme Court has ruled that, under the Wyoming Constitution, the state’s mineral wealth should benefit all school children, wherever they live. The court also has ruled that funding for schools must be adequate, equitable and cost-based. All tax revenue beyond a district’s needs, computed by the funding formula, should be available to support schools in other parts of the state; an important provision for counties like Albany that have low per capita tax revenues. Adopting Amendment B may prevent further finance litigation. Amendment B will correct a serious funding inequity among school districts. (By the Wyoming Education Association and Equality State Policy Center)

Con Amendment B: The school funding formula covers basic costs, and it’s not enough for districts coping with energy boom growth and demands for more teachers and classrooms. They need extra dollars. Also, there’s no guarantee extra money collected by the state would go to school districts or any other educational purpose. School districts with high tax revenue per student already send millions of dollars to the state. Voting “no” on Amendment B will keep extra local tax dollars under the control of local school boards. (By Vern McAdams, Business Manager, Sublette School District #1)

Article 15, Section 20. Higher education trust funds; investments; earnings. This amendment authorizes the creation of permanent funds for two purposes: first, higher education scholarships, which include the current Hathaway Scholarship program; and second, improving the quality of higher education. The principal in the funds, regardless of the source of the funds, cannot be expended. The legislature is authorized to regulate how earnings are used for their stated purposes. The amendment would also allow the funds to be invested as the Legislature authorizes, including in stocks.

Pro Amendment C: Amendment C would ensure that the funds needed for the popular Hathaway scholarships could not be diverted to other uses in lean years. This amendment would secure funds for improving the education available at UW and community colleges. Appropriately, the Legislature will decide what those improvements will be. The state’s ability to invest the trust fund in stocks would mean higher income from the fund and more money for scholarships and endowed chairs. (By the Equality State Policy Center)