Committee Meeting Information
July 30 & 31, 2007
Room 302, Capitol Building
Cheyenne, Wyoming
Committee Members Present
Senator Cale Case, Co-Chairman
Representative Pete Illoway, Co-Chairman
Senator Ken Decaria
Senator Stan Cooper
Senator Grant Larson
Senator Charlie Scott
Representative Kermit Brown
Representative Mary Gilmore
Representative Saundra Meyer
Representative Lorraine Quarberg
Representative Dan Zwonitzer
committee Members Absent
Representative Marty Martin
Representative David Miller
Representative Tom Walsh
Legislative Service Office Staff
Lynda Cook, Staff Attorney
Others Present at Meeting
Please refer to
Appendix 1 to review the Committee Sign-in Sheet
for a list of other individuals who attended the meeting.
Joint Corporations Interim Committee Meeting Summary (July 30 & 31, 2007)
The Joint Corporations, Elections and Political Subdivisions Interim Committee met in Cheyenne to consider the issues of election reform, campaign finance limitations, special district election laws, and business friendly versus fraud friendly statutes. The committee also considered possible changes to the subdivision statutes. The committee worked legislation regarding all these topics.
Call To Order
Co-Chairman Illoway called the meeting to order at 8:30 am. The following sections summarize the Committee proceedings by topic. Please see the Agenda for details. (Appendix 2).
approval of minutes
The committee approved the minutes of the May, 2007 meeting.
Special District Issues
08 LSO 0023.W1 – Foreclosure – redemption period. (Appendix 3)
Dave Johnson, Wyoming Bankers Association, testified that legislation is needed to provide a shorter foreclosure period for larger acre parcels. Currently anything over 20 acres has a one year foreclosure redemption period because it is considered agricultural land. The bill changes the definition of agricultural land subject to the longer redemption period to include only parcels over 80 acres.
The committee discussed the ramifications of broadening the acreage in the definition.
Jim Magagna, Wyoming Stockgrowers Association, testified in support of the bill. The longer redemption period is important to ranchers but he testified that 80 acres is an acceptable acreage to have the longer period.
Lori Urbigkit, Wyoming Realtors Association, testified in support of the bill.
The committee voted to support the bill. (Senator Larson declared a conflict)
08 LSO 0026.W1 – Special district elections. (Appendix 4)
The bill attempts to make it easier to expand a special district without an election when all the landowners and voters in the expanded area agree to the expansion. The committee noted that LSO included a staff note regarding the constitutionality of one man one vote issues raised by the bill. (Appendix 5). The committee made the following amendments:
Page 2-line 1 – After “voters” insert “or the landowners”.
Page 2-line 3 – After “commissioners.” delete entirely through Page 2-line 6 “commissioners.”
Page 2-line 21 after “landowners” insert “and all voters”.
The bill passed unanimously as amended.
Special Assessment Districts.
Senator Cooper provided written testimony regarding the use of improvement and service districts to collect fees which are really home owner association dues. (Appendix 6) County treasurers are concerned that collection of taxes which are used for these purposes is not a function of the government. Additionally, a county treasurer is not allowed to retain the portion of the assessment that should be used to pay property taxes. Senator Cooper suggested that the way to solve this problem is to tighten up the statute allowing for the creation of ISD’s to ensure that those taxes cannot be used for HOA functions. The committee took no action on the issue.
08 LSO 0029.W1 – Subdivisions – development. (Appendix 7)
Chairman Illoway explained how the bill is designed to allow cluster developments. It also incorporates other issues regarding small acre subdivisions that were in bills last year.
Laurie Urbigkit testified that realtors are very interested in how the bill allows for cluster developments. She would like to see the cluster development fast track provisions apply to large acre subdivisions too. She testified that the part of the bill that requires a full mineral search is very problematic and they are strongly opposed to that provision.
Mark Reed, planning director for Sheridan County, testified regarding the design process encompassed in the bill. He stated that some counties are currently accomplishing these design functions through the planning and zoning process. He described the benefits of codifying the process as including consistency throughout the state. He provided maps showing a conventional 40 acre subdivision scenario. He then provided a conservation design map of the same section. (Appendix 8). He noted that the bill would allow for the fast track of conservation designs that is not currently available. There was discussion regarding the necessity of a public hearing for these conservation design/cluster permits. The bill leaves that decision up to the county commissioners. There was also discussion on whether there was a need to have a limitation on gross density. Mr. Reed reminded the committee that the county currently does not have any ability to review over 35 acre developments. This bill would allow some review because it would encourage wiser development.
John Robitaille, Petroleum Association, testified in support of the language requiring disclosure of the mineral estate but stated that they would not be opposed to leaving out disclosure of the subsurface mineral estate.
Brenda Arnold, Laramie County Assessor, testified that she believes counties can currently do these cluster developments, but this bill would allow counties to avoid the public hearing process. She also noted that currently people are using this process to retain the use of the open space land. She expressed concern that this bill would allow development without the public input process. The assessors believe that the current statutes are adequate to allow this type of design and don’t need to be changed. She also noted that if this goes forward the committee needs to consider the agricultural tax exemption because the open areas within the subdivision would still be taxed as residential because they are within a subdivision.
Mark Kot, Sweetwater County Planner, testified that his commissioners testified in opposition to the proposed changes to the definition of “sell” in the bill when that language was in last year's bill. He discussed the buyer protections that are built into the current language. He also testified that county commissioners should not be required to police homeowners associations. He felt that the provision should be permissive.
Joe Evans, County Commissioners Association, testified regarding the timing of the process. He expressed concern that changing the definition of “sell" could result in developers putting pressure on commissioners to approve the plat as proposed by the developer.
Frank Falen, attorney, expressed concern with bill. He supports the idea of providing a mechanism for avoiding the subdivision permitting process for well designed projects. He reiterated his concern about the costs of going through the subdivision process.
Senator Larson stated that he is adamantly opposed to any process that exempts
the development from the public hearing process. He noted that there is no
definition of open space and that needs to be thought through. He noted that
notification to the state engineer after the fact of the approval is
unacceptable.
It was noted that there are no requirements that the cost savings would be passed on to the buyer.
The chairmen laid the bill back with guidance to Senator Scott and Representative Brown to work with staff and bring the bill back next meeting. The bill will be amended to address some of the issues raised by the members.
08 LSO 0027.W1 – Subdivisions – Large acre parcels. (Appendix 9)
Joe Evans testified regarding the bill. The bill was a kitchen sink approach which juxtaposes all the current requirements on less than 35 acre parcels onto 35 acre or larger parcels. The committee went through each provision to decide if it is appropriate for the larger acre subdivisions. Mr. Evans provided copies of the provisions that the County Commissioners Association supports having in this bill. (Appendix 10). The Association would also like to see the amendments to W.S. 18-5-309 that are currently included in 08 LSO 0029.W1.
Doug Cooper, rancher, provided written testimony in support of the bill. (Appendix 11) He mentioned the problems associated with the current statutory scheme. He also wants to see some way for adjacent landowners to enforce covenants on large scale developments. He argued that the county should be allowed to assess an impact fee for the additional costs of policing these lots.
Ed Pfursich, investor, testified that he likes that 35 acre pieces are affordable for many people. He noted that making prices more expensive will attract less diversity in ownership. He stated that some tightening of the requirements would be good though.
Philip and Freddie Wilson, Teton county residents, testified regarding their experience with creating a subdivision. They are concerned about giving more authority to county commissioners that they allege already abuse the process.
Frank Falen, attorney, testified regarding the costs associated with going through the process. He believes that the current law does not put any limits on local governments. He testified regarding the arbitrary authority being wielded by county planners. He feels that the current laws do not have any standards that are equal across the board. He related the story of one his clients who had similar issues to what the Wilsons went through. He argued that the bill should be tailored with the understanding that these large parcels are generally not being built on.
Jim Magagna, Wyo. Stockgrowers Association, provided a set of principals that they would like to see the bill address. (Appendix 12). First and foremost is that the Stockgrowers Association feels the regulation should be based on the degree of the change of use rather than an arbitrary acreage number. The focus should be on addressing the impacts rather than controlling the division of land. The bill should incorporate impact fees to address the impacts. The bill should also build in incentives, including lower impact fees for good development. He argued that there is broad support for the use of impact fees. There was discussion regarding how impact fees should be assessed and the timing of those fees. He stated that the legislation should describe what fees can be assessed for but let the dollar amount be set by the county to meet the true expenses to the county. The committee discussed how many different impacts could be addressed and how those would be juxtaposed on the special districts that are already there or may be there in the future.
Buck Holmes, rancher and board member of the Laramie County Fire District #2, testified about the inability of special districts to meet the needs of constituents due to the mill levy caps. This is exacerbated by large acre subdivisions. He argued that developments should not come in unless they can pay their own way for increased services.
Laurie Urbigkit, Realtor's Association, testified that the association does not support the bill as written but probably supports the amendments proposed by the county commissioners association. She stated that her association does not support impact fees but she noted that Montana has impact fee statutes that are well written. She specifically mentioned 2005 Montana Senate Bill 185. She also noted that the committee needs to think about how a new law would affect works in progress.
Rick Anderson, Brooks Associates, testified regarding the tax status of these large acre lots. He also testified regarding the maintenance and repair of roads. He suggested that he doesn’t see how the roads could affect wildlife habitat. There was discussion regarding the disclosure his company is already providing to their customers. There was discussion regarding how the homeowner’s association in these subdivisions can enforce the covenants. There was also discussion about whether open space was considered by his company when building these large acre subdivisions. He stated that it was not considered in their plans.
Brenda Arnold, Laramie County Assessor, testified in support of the amendments proposed by the county commissioners association. She stated that this process would give the county a heads up regarding the services that may be needed in the near future.
Trace Brooks, Brooks Realty, testified that he believes the perception of what problems are occurring is all wrong. He is surprised how much resentment he is receiving in Wyoming. He stated that his company is not selling land without telling people what they are getting into. He stated that he and his company have always met with the counties prior to beginning a project to ask for their input. He argued that they are policing the land better than it was being policed before. It was noted that of the 1000 lots they have created on the old BB Brooks ranch, only 6 buildings have been built. He noted that there is a law in Arizona that requires a specified disclosure for 36 acre and larger lots. Senator Larson asked Mr. Brooks to provide written comments on the legislation to the committee.
The committee asked LSO to prepare another draft of the bill with the following conceptual amendments:
Incorporate the county commissioners' association's recommended amendments. Add a provision that utilities not be required and a county may not deny a building permit for lack of any specified utility availability. Make it clear that these are not platted subdivisions for tax purposes. The bill should require notice of contract for deed to be filed with the county assessor. The bill should provide a clear statement that the new requirements do not apply to subdivisions that are already developed. Counties may require these additional provisions on a subdivision by subdivision basis. The bill should include authority to apply some impact fees. The bill should bring in the fire protection district notification requested by Chairman Illoway. Finally, the bill should address minimum road requirements.
The committee also asked to see copies of the Montana statutes dealing with impact fees.
08 LSO 0016.W2 – Campaign finance reporting. (Appendix 13)
Robert Stern, Center for Governmental Studies provided written testimony regarding the bill. (Appendix 14).
Peggy Nighswonger, Secretary of State's Office, presented the bill although the bill is an amalgamation of issues requested by the Secretary of State’s Office and issues requested by the Equality State Policy Center. The bill allows for electronic filing of campaign finance reports and creation of a searchable database.
Julie Frees, Fremont county clerk testified regarding the provisions the county clerks requested. The reason they would like to see a minimum amount for filing of reports is because many county level races involve persons who don’t raise or spend very much money.
There was committee discussion regarding the inclusion of a requirement that candidates list the occupation and employer of every contributor.
Marion Loomis, Wyoming Mining Association, noted that the bill would require a great deal more from political action committees than are currently in law.
Pat Arp, Secretary of State's Office, testified regarding the computer availability in Wyoming. The state ranks 16th nationally in terms of households with computers. Fifty-eight percent of households have internet service.
Dr. Arp discussed the fiscal impact of the bill. Other states report spending $2.5 – 3 million on these searchable databases.
There was discussion about the propriety of the bill in general. It was argued that the bill puts a number of additional burdens on candidates that may discourage people from running. There was concern that campaign finance limitations are a limit on free speech.
Dan Neal, Equality State Policy Center, and Marguerite Herman, League of Women Voters, spoke in favor of the bill.
The following amendments were approved:
Page 2-line 16 through 18 Delete all new language.
Page 2-lines 18 and 19 Strike "one thousand dollars ($1,000.00)" insert "three thousand five hundred dollars ($3,500.00)".
Page 2-line 22 Strike "nor make"
Page 2-lines 23 and 24 Strike entirely.
Page 3-line 1 Strike "period.".
Page 3-line 14 After "is" insert ", upon conviction in district court,".
Page 4-line 3 Delete "or candidate's campaign".
Page 4-line 4 Delete "committee".
Page 4-line 5 Delete "two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500.00)" insert "three thousand five hundred dollars ($3,500.00)".
Page 4-line 7 Delete "five thousand dollars ($5,000.00)" insert "seven thousand dollars ($7,000.00)".
Page 4-After line 19 Insert:
"(k) Contributions donated to a political action committee which are designated by the donor to be used only for a particular candidate and no other purpose are subject the limitations of subsection (c) of this section.".
Page 6-lines 5 through 18 Delete all new language.
Page 6-line 18 After "election" insert ". Any additional receipts of one thousand five hundred dollars ($1,500.00) or more received from any one (1) contributor shall be reported not later than the close of the following business day".
Page 7-line 12 through Page 8-line 12 Delete entirely.
Page 8-line 14 through Page 9-line 2 Delete entirely.
Page 10-line 24 Strike "fails" insert "is convicted of failure".
Page 11-lines 1 through 5 Delete all new language; reinsert all stricken language.
Page 11-line 17 Strike "felony" insert "misdemeanor"; strike "two (2) years" insert "one (1) year".
Page 12-lines 4 through 21 Delete entirely.
Page 12-line 23 Delete "XXX dollars ($XX.00)" insert "two million five hundred thousand dollars ($2,500,000.00)".
Page 12-line 25 Delete "2009" insert "2010".
The committee directed LSO staff to figure out what needs to be separated out for immediate effective dates and to separate the bill into two bills: one dealing with electronic filing and one with substantive campaign finance reform. The bills will be brought back at the next meeting for consideration.
07 LSO 0042.C1 – Corporations. (Appendix 15)
Scott Meier, attorney, testified that he and other attorneys looked at the current business corporations statutes and how they compare to the model corporations act. He noted that there are several areas that need to be addressed with various levels of complexity. The working group he has put together will prepare recommendations for the committee to consider in this upcoming interim. The working group will also include the secretary of state’s office. The chairmen asked Scott to work with LSO staff to ensure that the members of the committee know about the meetings of the working group. The committee asked Mr. Meier to come to the November meeting to update them on the progress of the working group.
Real Estate Commission issues.
Donna Rice, Director of the Wyoming Real Estate Commission, addressed the committee. The real estate licensing act defines “this act” incorrectly. The attorney general has halted processing cases because of this omission. W.S. 33-28-101 through 406 is the correct citation. The committee directed staff to draft a bill to amend the problem and asked Ms. Rice to send a letter that the committee can forward to management council to request permission to take up the matter.
08 LSO 0028.W3 – Election code revisions. (Appendix 16)
The bill involves clean up measures to the election code. It allows for further electronic record keeping and streamlined filings. There was discussion regarding the ability to register to vote on election day. The bill changes the cutoff for preregistration to accommodate printing of the poll books, but people can still register and vote on election day too. The bill allows for voter registration in public areas rather than just buildings. The bill removes the filing fee for candidates for special district directors, school district trustees and community college trustees.
The following amendments were adopted:
Page 5-line 17 After "columns" insert ", row or rows".
Page 5-line 19 After "column" insert "or beginning of the row".
Page 7-line 7 Delete "with the approval of" insert "approved by".
Page 8-line 15 Strike "mail".
Page 12-line 9 Strike "accepted" insert "provided".
Page 12-line 21 Change to an immediate effective date.
The bill passed as amended unanimously.
08 LSO 0025.W2- Business entities-registered agents. (Appendix 17)
Secretary of State Max Maxfield introduced the bill. Karen Wheeler, Secretary of State's Office, explained the bill. The bill creates consistent registered agent and registered office requirements across all business entities. It establishes consistent requirements for service of process and duties of registered agents. The bill makes uniform the record retention and record production requirements. The bill also establishes minimum standards for commercial registered agents and provides remedies for failure to comply with the requirements.
Tom Jones, National Federation of Businesses, testified that he is concerned that the bill treats mom and pop businesses similarly to commercial agents. He is also concerned that the bill provides the secretary of state with too much authority without due process.
Dave Pickard, Wyo. Corporate Services, testified that he is concerned about making a registered agent criminally liable if they fail to maintain the names and addresses of directors and managers when they may not even know when those names are changed.
The Secretary of State's Office provided multiple amendment suggestions to the bill. The committee asked LSO to work with the Secretary of State's Office to incorporate those amendments and various other suggestions of the committee into a new draft to be reviewed at the November meeting.
08 LSO 0030.W2 – Business entities-revisions. (Appendix 18)
Karen Wheeler presented the bill. The bill creates penalties for signing false document and creates a method for the Secretary of State to administratively dissolve or revoke domestic and foreign limited liability companies and corporations for signing false documents, failing to respond to a subpoena, providing false documents and failing to have a registered agent.
The committee asked LSO to work with the Secretary of State's Office to incorporate amendments they proposed and various other suggestions of the committee into a new draft to be reviewed at the November meeting.
Meeting Adjournment
There being no further business, Co-Chairman Cale Case adjourned the meeting at 5:45 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
Representative Pete Illoway, Co-Chairman Senator Cale Case, Co-Chairman
|
Appendix |
|
Appendix Topic |
|
Appendix Description |
|
Appendix Provider |
|
1 |
|
Committee Sign-In Sheet |
|
Lists meeting attendees |
|
Legislative Service Office |
|
2 |
|
Committee Meeting Agenda |
|
Provides an outline of the topics the Committee planned to address at meeting |
|
Legislative Service Office |
|
3 |
|
Special Districts |
|
08 LSO 0023.W1-Foreclosure-redemption periods. |
|
Legislative Service Office |
|
4 |
|
Special Districts |
|
08 LSO 0026.W1-Special districts-elections. |
|
Legislative Service Office |
|
5 |
|
Special Districts |
|
Memo from LSO re: voting eligibility |
|
Legislative Service Office |
|
6 |
|
Special Districts |
|
Memo from Sen. Cooper re: special improvement districts |
|
Senator Stan Cooper |
|
7 |
|
Subdivisions |
|
08 LSO 0029.W1-Subdivisions- development. |
|
Legislative Service Office |
|
8 |
|
Subdivisions |
|
Maps |
|
Mark Reed |
|
9 |
|
Subdivisions |
|
08 LSO 0027.W1-Subdivisions-large acre parcels. |
|
Legislative Service Office |
|
10 |
|
Subdivisions |
|
Proposed amendments to 08 LSO 0027.W1 |
|
Joe Evans |
|
11 |
|
Subdivisions |
|
Written testimony |
|
Doug Cooper |
|
12 |
|
Subdivisions |
|
Written testimony |
|
Jim Magagna |
|
13 |
|
Elections |
|
08 LSO 0016.W2-Campaign finance reporting |
|
Legislative Service Office |
|
14 |
|
Elections |
|
Written testimony |
|
Robert Stern |
|
15 |
|
Business Entities |
|
07 LSO 0042.C1-Corporations |
|
Legislative Service Office |
|
16 |
|
Elections |
|
08 LSO 0028.W3-Election code revisions. |
|
Legislative Service Office |
|
17 |
|
Business Entities |
|
08 LSO 0025.W2-Business entities-registered agents. |
|
Legislative Service Office |
|
18 |
|
Business Entities |
|
08 LSO 0030.W2-Business entities-revisions. |
|
Legislative Service Office |
![[Top]](/images/nav-top.gif)
![[Back]](/images/nav-back.gif)
![[Home]](/images/nav-home.gif)