ESPC Home | 2005 LAP* Book | Background | Legislator Profiles | Key Votes | LAP* Book Home


Numeric List

Budget

Accountability

Health &
Human Services

Justice System

Education

State Employees

Taxation &
Revenue

Wildlife &
Environment

Worker &
Public Safety

Tribal Affairs

Senior Citizens

SF 19: State Lands Trust Responsibilitiese
2005 General Session
Sponsor: Joint Agriculture, Public Lands and Water Resources Interim Committee
Legislator votes
by regions
Big Horn Basin
Casper-Area
Cheyenne-Area
Gillette-Area
Lander/Riverton-Area
Northeast/East Central
Sheridan-Area
South Central
Southwest
West Central


         SF 19 established and funded a task force to review the trust responsibilities and budget of the Office of State Lands and Investments.
         The task force will be composed of the five elected state officials (governor, secretary of state, auditor, treasurer and superintendent of public instruction), plus one representative from each of the following interests: public schools, grazing and agriculture, mineral, recreational, and forestry, plus one additional at-large member. The task force will review the Office of State Lands’ annual budget, expenditures and revenues, and recommend changes in funding of the office.
         The bill as passed included an appropriation of $30,000 to fund the work of the task force.
         The Senate removed funding for the work of the task force, and then passed the bill, 16-14. The House restored $30,000 to the bill in funding, and then passed it unanimously. The Senate rejected the House version of the bill, sending it into a conference committee, which reported out a bill that included the $30,000 in funding. This final version of the bill was unanimously adopted by both the House and the Senate.
         The votes listed below are the third reading votes in the House and Senate. For representatives, a YES vote means the representative wanted to establish the task force and provide it with $30,000 in funding. For Senators, a YES vote means the senator wanted to establish the task force with no funding, while a NO vote means the senator did not want to establish the task force with no funding.