Despite the failure of recent deeply unpopular proposals to sell parcels of public land to the highest bidder, Rep. Harriet Hageman, R-Wyo., appears to still be in favor of Utah Sen. Mike Lee’s, R-Utah, continued efforts to sell off chunks of the country’s portfolio of properties.

At Hageman’s Converse County town hall event Monday, a question from the audience inspired the second term representative to discuss her commitment to sell public land for sale in an attempt to increase property available to municipalities to relieve housing and infrastructure concerns, as well as attempting to cover the cost of tax relief to the nation’s top earners.

“I think that we have to talk about our federal lands,” Hageman said during the question and answer period at the end of the meeting. “When you’re talking about the western part of the state, or Utah or Nevada, I think that there has to be that discussion among the communities and BLM as to how best to use those lands.”

Hageman said Wyoming’s “surface estate is 48% owned by the federal government.” The actual percentage is 46.7%, according to Congress.gov.

In Utah, almost 65% is federal lands and in Nevada it’s about 87% owned by the federal government by agencies like the National Forest Service, national parks, or BLM and BOR (Bureau of Reclamation) managed lands.

“It is very difficult for these communities [bordered by federal lands] to be able to expand because they’re surrounded by BLM,” she said. “So it was targeted solely for purposes of residential, and it was solely to be very community driven. So that’s what Mike Lee was doing.”

Meanwhile, Hageman said, municipalities are clamoring for additional space. She used Kemmerer, which has been growing quickly in the past few years.

“The intent of [what] Mike Lee’s bill would have done would be that the local community in the state would work with the BLM to identify lands that would be contiguous to Kemmerer,” she said. “I think that the folks in Kemmerer, if they identify 5 acres or 7 acres that are contiguous to the community, I think that that has to be a discussion.”

Kemmerer is experiencing a surge in growth due to the development of TerraPower’s Natrium nuclear power plant and related projects. The development is attracting new businesses, and it is also creating a need for expanded infrastructure and housing. While the town anticipates significant growth, it also faces challenges related to its existing infrastructure and the need to manage the influx of new residents and workers. More than 12,000 workers are expected in the coming years to build the energy development projects.

Critics of the amendment to sell public lands stated Lee’s amendment did little to address the challenges of building affordable housing on public land. Hageman said she talked to Laramie Mayor Sharon Cumbie, who she said was concerned the Snowy Range would be developed if Lee’s bill would have passed.

“[Cumbie] said, ‘but we don’t want to sell off the Snowy Range,’” according to Hageman. “And I said, who in their right mind would sell off the Snowy Range to provide housing? And Laramie, I mean, would anybody do that? Would anybody with a lick of sense do that? I mean, that wouldn’t even get off the ground. That wouldn’t even be discussed. First of all, it’s Forest Service, but nobody would even consider doing that.”

She asked for folks to use a little common sense, saying, “I’m absolutely willing to discuss what we can do to better manage our BLM and Forest Service lands.”

Sen. Lee’s bill failed in budget reconciliation — a sticking point to authorizing President Donald Trump’s Big, Beautiful Bill — but Lee is not backing down on the idea.

Proponents of selling public land argue that sales can address issues like housing shortages and generate revenue. They also argue that local control can lead to more efficient management.

Opponents argue that such sales could have negative impacts on recreation and public access, wildlife and the environment, local economies reliant on outdoor recreation and tourism and the potential for land to be sold to private interests or foreign entities.

Cumbie said she did have a conversation with Hageman; her concern regarded the general vagueness for the language of the amendment that was ultimately withdrawn/removed.

“I did make a statement that the language was so vague that some of my constituents were concerned that a billionaire might swoop in and buy a major portion of the Snowy Range,” Cumbie said. “I expressed concern with the lack of definition for infrastructure and asked if this might be only a road that would qualify a property for sale. I also questioned the motive behind the push for a minimum amount of land be sold in a relatively quick timeline, again allowing individuals with massive wealth to dominate the process. Being in municipal government, I know the lengthy timeline it takes to bring an “affordable housing” project forward.”

Mayor Cumbie said she advocated for our public lands as a “most basic way of life for the people of Wyoming.”

She penned a letter to Wyoming’s national delegation on behalf of the City of Laramie and City Council in opposition of the amendment. She said Sen. John Barrasso, R-Wyo., who she also wrote to, called her the day after receiving the letter, but Hageman didn’t respond nearly as fast.

“Ms. Hageman took almost two months to contact me and when she did, it was primarily a pitch,” Cumbie said.

None of Wyoming’s U.S. delegation stood against the amendment. Sen. Barrasso’s spokesperson said, “Senator Barrasso has always been supportive of federal land sales when they serve the interests of states, local communities and the public. The proposal under discussion impacts less than 1% of our federal lands. It gives states and local governments a voice in the decisions.”

Sen. Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyo., never spoke out against the amendment. And Barrasso and Lummis both voted against a measure that would have blocked the government from selling public land to help fund the federal budget.

However, Hageman used the conversation to highlight a need for common sense in the process.

“We’ve got to use a little bit of common sense here, and then also read the bill,” Hageman said.

Lee’s bill failed, partly because representatives in Montana, including former Secretary of the Interior Ryan Zinke, who is now a U.S. representative from the Gem State, said they would rather go against the party and vote the bill down than to allow the sell-off in their state. Montana’s federal delegation, along with strong public opposition, successfully advocated for the removal provisions concerning Montana’s public lands prior to the amendment being removed from the bill.

“If a provision to sell public lands is in the bill that reaches the House floor, we will be forced to vote no,” Zinke said in a statement on his official Congressional website prior to the amendment being removed from the bill. He celebrated when the amendment was pulled from the bill.

“TR [President Teddy Roosevelt] would be proud. Bully! We defended our San Juan Hill, and we won,” he said after Montana was removed from the amendment.

Zinke was formerly the Secretary of Interior during the first Trump administration, but resigned amid investigations into scandals.

Despite the setback, Lee indicated he would continue to pursue the idea of selling public lands to address housing issues, potentially with modifications like limiting sales to land near population centers. Either way, it appears likely he has Wyoming’s lone U.S. representative willing to back his efforts in Hageman.

“We never, ever, ever talk about ever disposing of any federal lands under any circumstance whatsoever,” Hageman said earlier this year. “That absolutely makes no sense whatsoever in a growing country.”

Rep. Hageman was contacted by the Powell Tribune for this story, but did not return request for comment.

Current Federal Land Policy and Management Act rules allow for the disposal of lands at discretionary values realizing that local municipalities cannot afford to pay market value. Lands with “valid existing rights” are exempt from disposal.