Editorial:

Tax cut could have been bigger if revenue backfill had remained

Posted 3/11/25

The 25% tax cut passed by the Legislature and signed by the governor during the final week of the session will be a boon to property owners and, hopefully, renters as well. 

However, …

This item is available in full to subscribers.

Please log in to continue

E-mail
Password
Log in
Editorial:

Tax cut could have been bigger if revenue backfill had remained

Posted

The 25% tax cut passed by the Legislature and signed by the governor during the final week of the session will be a boon to property owners and, hopefully, renters as well. 

However, without a way to backfill state revenue, this will be a hit to all of the schools, special districts, counties and municipalities that have had to cope with inflation and where, to some degree, extra funds received thanks to higher property taxes have gone to fund projects very needed, but that had been pushed back for years. 

So, while as former County Assessor Pat Meyer previously asserted, entities such as the county government may be able to get by with some reduction in revenue, there’s still plenty of work to be done. For instance, county public works recently wrapped up a $2 million expansion of the landfill south of Cody, and the second phase of the Willwood road improvement project is set to get underway soon. 

We still want good roads and great schools (and now more financial support for parents who want private schooling). These things cost money, so if any more property tax reduction occurs, it really should be alongside some replacement revenue source. 

Regrettably, backfill is something Gov. Mark Gordon has opposed since vetoing a similar bill last legislative session. The Freedom Caucus in the House, led by Rep. Rachel Rodriguez-Williams, R-Cody, had actually pushed for a 50% property tax cut with a backfill to cover at least some of that loss in revenue, but with Gordon’s looming veto power, the Legislature agreed on the smaller cut without a backfill.

So, it seems like this 25% cut may be the best that can be expected for now. It’s still a welcome relief for property owners, although it will put an unfortunate strain on entities that rely on the revenue.

Comments

No comments on this story    Please log in to comment by clicking here
Please log in or register to add your comment