Terry Call

If you read the last column, you might expect my opinion on the proposed 50% Ballot Initiative. But that isn’t the role of the county assessor. My responsibility is to administer Wyoming’s valuation laws fairly and without bias and help taxpayers understand them, not to campaign for or against tax policy.

The 50% Ballot Initiative deserves more than campaign slogans. Whether you vote for it or against it, I hope you’ll understand what it would do, how it differs from current law, and the questions worth considering before marking your ballot.

To understand how we got here, it helps to look back.

Demand for Wyoming homes rose dramatically beginning in 2021. Property values climbed rapidly, and property taxes followed. Salaries did not rise nearly as quickly. After decades of relatively modest annual increases, many homeowners saw increases they had never imagined. Families accustomed to increases of perhaps 3% to 6% could face real hardship when increases reached 25% in consecutive years.

The property tax system did what a market-value system is designed to do: As market values changed, taxable values followed. The system worked as designed, but for many taxpayers the result became increasingly difficult to absorb.

Many taxpayers understandably demanded county assessors do something. As discussed in the previous column, assessors don’t have authority to rewrite tax policy. Local governments and districts can lower mills, but 1- or 2-mill reductions provide relatively modest relief for the average homeowner. That left meaningful, broad-based relief largely in the hands of state policymakers.

When many citizens felt the legislative process was moving too slowly, they turned to the initiative process. Beginning in October 2023, volunteers gathered signatures across Wyoming. By January 2025, enough had been collected for the Secretary of State to certify the “People’s Initiative to Limit Property Tax in Wyoming through a Homeowner’s Property Exemption.”

So, what would it actually do?

The initiative would exempt 50% of the taxable value of an owner-occupied home, but not the residential land beneath it. Wyoming’s current homeowner exemptions work differently. The existing 25% Homeowner Exemption applies to both the house and residential land, as does the 50% Long-Term Homeowner Exemption for qualifying seniors. The proposed initiative applies only to the house.

The eligibility and application rules also differ. Under the proposed initiative, a homeowner must have been a Wyoming resident for at least one year when applying, occupied the home for at least six months during the previous tax year, and file a sworn claim with the assessor by the fourth Monday in May.

The two current homeowner exemptions require at least eight months of occupancy and an application from Oct. 1 through March 1. The 25% Homeowner Exemption affidavit is available online only, while the 50% Long-Term Homeowner Exemption may be renewed in person, by phone, mail or other communication.

With three exemptions potentially operating under different requirements, deadlines and application methods, assessors have asked the Legislature for a simpler process. That is an administrative concern separate from the policy question voters will decide.

The property tax conversation has also changed since the petition drive began. Over the past two years, lawmakers debated many property tax bills, adopted a residential tax cap, expanded homeowner exemptions, continued refund programs for qualifying taxpayers with limited income and assets, and significantly reformed personal property taxation.

Voters are therefore considering the initiative in a different policy environment than existed in late 2023. That doesn’t make it better or worse; it means the conversation has changed.

Are we seeking
relief or reform?

If the goal is immediate tax relief, a 50% exemption clearly provides meaningful relief. If the goal is a property tax system that remains predictable, affordable, equitable and sustainable for decades, the conversation becomes broader. Those aren’t necessarily the same objective.

Relief answers today’s problem. Reform prepares for tomorrow’s.

Over the years, I’ve had many conversations with taxpayers about their bills. Few simply say they want to pay less regardless of the consequences. More often I hear, “I don’t mind paying my fair share. I just don’t want to be surprised by it.”

Being able to budget matters. That brings us to an important distinction: A 50% exemption is not a freeze.

If a house is worth $400,000 today, a 50% exemption leaves $200,000 subject to taxation. If it later rises to $500,000, the same exemption leaves $250,000 subject to taxation. The exemption can provide substantial immediate relief while the taxable portion can still rise with market values.

That doesn’t diminish the immediate effect. For a qualifying homeowner whose property value has risen much faster than income, the relief could be substantial. A voter may reasonably conclude that relief is worth the resulting reduction in revenue. Another may reasonably disagree.

Every property tax dollar has two sides: a cost to the taxpayer and revenue to a government entity providing public services.

Recent exemptions have provided significant relief. In Park County, their combined effect has moved taxable residential values considerably closer to levels seen several years ago. But the cost of roads, public safety, schools, libraries, emergency services and other public functions has not returned to those levels.

Taxpayers and government face many of the same pressures. Insurance, fuel, equipment, construction, maintenance and wages all cost more. So far, Park County appears to have absorbed recent reductions reasonably well. But what can be managed for a year or two isn’t necessarily sustainable indefinitely. Reserves can only be spent once, equipment wears out, and deferred maintenance eventually comes due.

That doesn’t mean every government expenditure is necessary or every budget should increase. Government has a responsibility to justify spending, look for efficiencies, and determine whether services and expenditures still justify their cost. Sustained revenue reductions, however, eventually require some combination of lower spending, fewer services, deferred purchases or maintenance, increased fees, another revenue source, or greater efficiency.

That’s where public participation matters. Before deciding how you feel about the 50% Initiative, ask those responsible for the budgets what it would mean for the services they provide. Talk to county commissioners, school board members, cities and towns, and the boards governing fire, hospital, cemetery and other special districts. Attend a budget meeting, comment on a proposed budget, or call an elected official. Could the reduction be absorbed through efficiencies or reserves? Would services change? Would another revenue source eventually be needed?

You don’t have to attend every meeting or become a budget expert. But those responsible for the budgets are best positioned to explain what the initiative could mean. An informed vote should consider both the relief to taxpayers and what that relief may mean on the other side of the tax bill.

The 50% Initiative addresses one part of a much larger property-tax question. Whether it passes or fails, Wyoming’s property-tax debate isn’t over.

Whatever voters decide in November, the larger question remains: If Wyoming continues reforming property taxes, what would a better system actually look like?

Terry Call has been the Park County Assessor since February 2025 and has worked in the County Assessor's Office for 14 years.