- [Female Narrator] Your support helps us
bring you programs you love.
Go to wyomingpbs.org, click on "Support",
and become a sustaining member or an annual member.
It's easy and secure.
Thank you!
The Wyoming legislature is half way through it's work
In the 2018 budget session.
I'm Craig Blumenshine from
WyomingPBS. And welcome
to week two of Capitol Outlook.
We begin with an interesting debate
on whos responsiblity it is to make sure
that funds are available to provide eployee housing
in Teton County.
Then we'll turn to the memebers of the
memebers of the Joint Appropriation Comitee
What is a structural deficit? And how much is it?
We'll learn tonight.
Then we'll talk about maintenece work at the Wyoming State
Pennitentiary that's planned.
And then we'll turn to the leadership
of the Wyoming legislature
Does the State have a role in saving WyoTech in
Laramie?
Also, what about funding for future construction of
Wyoming schools? And capital construction projects
at the University of Wyoming?
All that's on Capitol Outlook. Which starts now.
(upbeat orchestral music)
- [Male Narrator] This program is supported in part
by a grant from the BNSF Railway Foundation,
dedicated to improving the general welfare
and quality of life in communities
throughout the BNSF Railway service area.
Proud to support WyomingPBS.
- [Female Narrator] And in part by
the Wyoming Public Television Endowment
and viewers like you.
- And welcome to week two of Capitol Outlook
here on WyomingPBS.
We're in Cheyenne, at the temporary capital,
in the Jonah Business Center,
and we have an interesting debate
we're going to have to start off
our show this week.
Representative Mike Gierau hails from Teton County.
Representative, welcome.
And Senator Ogden Driskill from Devil's Tower area.
Welcome to Capitol Outlook.
We appreciate your time.
An interesting debate that we wanted to,
in a sense, recreate from a committee meeting
that you both attended yesterday,
it was the Senate Corporations
Elections and Political subdivision's meeting.
And to set it up just a little bit,
we're going to talk about Senate File 114,
Senator Driskill, your bill,
but right before that happened
there was a bill that came before a committee
that expanded options for municipalities
to maybe create improvement districts,
to do certain things within their towns.
Now, here comes your bill.
First, describe for our viewers
what Senate File 114 was for,
and then we'll get into the discussion about the bill.
- The bill has to do with basically
the government extracting money
out of private business for affordable housing,
as I understand it, Teton County.
But actually, the statutes go much deeper than that.
Not a lot of cities and counties to
do this across the board.
And so what we've run into in Teton County,
and it was directed towards them when we did it,
I became aware of what was going on about the bill
because I really don't want to see this form
of government spread to my side of the state.
The example I used was a new 50-room motel into Jackson,
the exaction fees are about 500,000 now
and it's going to go to around two million dollars.
And, for a private landowner,
I took it as a private property right;
not as affordable housing.
A lot of debate turned towards affordable housing.
This is a huge private property issue
when you get into an area where
someone from the government is saying
you have to pay something in order to be able to
do something that's outside of the permit process
that didn't come about by a vote or you
being able to have any way to have a say in it.
It's just when you come in,
and I call it kind of the E's,
it's exaction, extraction, and extortion,
and they're really telling you
that you're going to have to pay something
to be able to do something.
And I had a hard time with that,
I'll kind of drop it at the intro with that
and we'll go back and forth in fairness
to giving Representative Mike the...
- Sure.
Just real quickly, what strikes me,
Senator and Representative Gierau,
we'll get into this,
this was a local decision by
local elected officials to assess these fees
with developers, et cetera, et cetera.
Representative, your side.
- Yep, and thank you as far as
for having both of us,
and Senator Driskill and I are old friends
and so it's good to be here with him
and to talk about this issue.
And I would never go so far as to call
Senator Driskill wrong on an issue,
but I think on this one he's just
a little short of being right.
The problem is is that this is a local issue.
As part of a local planning process
that our community's been going through
for well over 20 years,
we have voted on elected officials
in election after election using this
as the central issue.
I myself served six years as a
County Commissioner and I'll work with
private business on affordable housing fees
and affordable housing extractions,
as you call them, we call them exactions,
to try to work with business and try to
come up with something that was fair.
Right now, our county is going through
yet another planning process.
Are the issues and are the exaction fees
we're coming up with fair?
I don't know.
Matter of fact, the good senator might
agree on a few more of them than he might think,
but what I do know is is that they're
going through a full public process on this,
and always the voters,
and I guess this was my problem yesterday,
is why in the world would we be down here in Cheyenne
with so many issues, so many problems,
like funding for education, funding for state government,
and all the things that we have on our plate,
to take the time of the good senators,
learned people, good people, and talk to them
about something, frankly, that is a local issue
that should be dealt with with our
county commissioners and our town council,
and is on a daily basis.
- Senator, they've decided that this
is the way that they want to manage
the affordable housing crisis in Jackson Hole.
- Great point you made, Mike,
and I appreciate it and it highlights
exactly why I brought it,
is our focus outside of budget issues this year
is about how we're going to bring business
to Wyoming and how we're going to expand
our ability to do business in Wyoming.
And my idea of a business friend
to the community isn't to say,
"We're going to force you to do something."
It's to say, "We're going to encourage you to do it."
And I'm all in favor of a lot of the issues
and the means it goes,
I totally believe in local control.
I also believe in the ability of the voters
to have a say in it and I see nothing
in what they're doing that allows
much of an appeals process where it
comes to the vote of the people.
This is a decision that was made by
a governmental body that really doesn't
come up to the vote every year.
You know, lodging taxes, different taxes, things we do,
we bring them in front of the people.
And I get that people run on it,
but they're not getting to actually vote on it.
I also think we have a little different
situation there that there may be some people
that want to stifle development,
and I'm really pro-development,
I want it to go in a pro-development way
and I'd kind of like you to think about
where this might go.
- Representative, has it stifled development,
in your eyes?
- Well, no, but the good senator's not wrong.
There are folks in our community
that would like to slow development down,
some that would like to stop is altogether.
I'm not going to disagree with a lot of that
and I too, like the senator,
I'm a businessman and I have been for 38 years,
as has the senator.
And so we both see eye to eye on
some of these issues and that's why I say in,
for example, in the town of Jackson,
the town has worked with local developers
and local business owners to try to
come up with creative solutions.
Our mountain resort, our hospital,
our big employers work hand-in-hand
with the local elected officials
to try to work on creative ways.
Our hospital district and, like I said,
the Jackson Hole Mountain Resort to single out one,
and then there's some of the local
business centers as well,
have worked hand-in-hand in the cities,
giving out height variances
and other easing of restrictions
to try to encourage development.
There are some places that are so expensive
and so hard to achieve the goal of
affordable housing with incentives
that sometimes you have to go the other way.
So it is a carnistic approach and the senator's right,
absolutely right, couldn't agree with him more.
The things that happen in Teton County today,
I hope with the growth in our economy,
I hope that they too will get the growth
that they wanna have in your county.
And so I understand and I understand the apprehension.
- Senator, we'll give you the last word,
I was just going to say.
- Let me give you a little bit of an example
in where it goes and I applaud Teton County
for what they've done, by the way.
I think they're efforts at affordable housing are great,
the methods they're using are not so great,
but let me give you something a little bit to think about
and let's move to Mr. Gierau to Casper.
And we have a progressive council
in Casper nowadays and we're going
to put a deck on our house,
and to show you this isn't just business
because a house will happen everywhere,
the city says to you,
"Well, for the permit to put a deck on your house,
"we really need a new piece of playground
"equipment in Morad Park,"
and in return for you putting a
deck on your house you're going to buy
a piece of equipment for Morad Park
and you can't do it.
That's not how private business
or any function does,
and anybody that owns private property
has a right to enjoy the use of that property
and when someone comes in and says
you can only enjoy the use of that property
or be able to leverage it for your good
by being forced to do something
that you have no appeal process to
and no means to do it.
That is exactly what I presented
to the committee and it's kind of shocking,
it's Communism.
It's absolutely where we take one person's property
and we give a piece of property to someone else,
and with affordable housing it's really that way.
We've given them, someone else,
a piece of property of value or at a discount
that someone else paid for
and I really find that as a tough deal,
as someone that is a huge private property rights advocate.
it wasn't a state of Wyoming choice,
and I think that's where this debate
now is gonna go.
This bill failed by a tie-breaking vote
from Chairman Case in the committee yesterday,
yet I think the commitment was
to continue to study this in the interim.
Yep, Representative?
- I'd like just to clarify just a little bit.
That was a nice explanation
and I like the Communism comment,
but it just is, once again,
just a little short on being true.
And what is untrue about it,
and the part that's just a little bit not true,
is that we've gone through a 20-year
planning process beyond 20 years.
We've gone through half a dozen elections
where this is the number one issue in our county.
People run on it,
I ran on this issue when I was a County Commissioner,
to work with business to try to
come up with creative solutions.
Time and time and time again,
the local community has,
and through this planning part,
it's almost painful.
I frankly don't even like going to the meetings anymore
because we see that in debate
and work through and work with landowners
and work together to try to come up.
I know sometimes folks come up
on the short end of the vote.
When I'm dealing with Senator Driskill,
I'll come up on the short end a lot,
so we both know that.
But on the same token, in Teton County,
we have worked this issue,
the public is fully involved
literally from tee to green, as we say.
- Can I ask you how many votes
they've actually had of the people;
not just someone running on a platform,
but how many actually ballot initiatives
there's been that says, "We'd like to be able
"to extract money from people for affordable housing."
Have we actually done this?
- We'll need to wrap it up here,
go ahead, Representative.
- Yes, we have.
In the town of Jackson, the town,
with their Home Rule statues,
have the ability to take votes on
any planning issue that comes up,
to repeal them.
The county does not because the
state doesn't give them that.
So maybe that's something you and I will work on.
- Let me just, as we tie up this segment.
It was impressive to watch you two
have a civil debate yesterday in committee,
and it happens, quite frankly, quite a lot here.
More than I think some people are given credit for.
Everyone was listening.
The Chairman paused a substantial pause
before he cast his tie-breaking vote
and it was a wonderful debate,
and we wanted to bring that debate
to our viewers and I think we just did.
So we'll follow this issue in the future.
Senator Ogden Driskill, Senator Mike Gierau,
or, excuse me, Representative Mike Gierau,
thank you for joining us on Capitol Outlook.
- Always a pleasure.
(upbeat orchestral music)
- And now we're in our second segment
of Capitol Outlook this evening,
and we're pleased to be joined by
Representative Don Burkhart from Carbon County
and the Chairman of the House Appropriations Committee,
Representative Bob Nicholas,
he hails from Laramie County.
Welcome both to Capitol Outlook.
We are gonna talk about the Wyoming State
Penitentiary in Rawlins in just a moment,
but before we get into that,
I wanna have a discussion for our viewers' benefit
about your work on the Joint Appropriations Committee.
Both the House and the Senate now
are hearing amendments to the budget
that you spent an awful lot of time
in the last few months creating,
and there's this thing called the
structural deficit that is a term
that you hear here often.
You've heard different numbers
associated with that and, Chairman Nicholas,
I'd like you to maybe define that for us
and define where it is within the
budget structure that you're considering now.
- Well, there is no precise definition of it,
but generally the concept is that
if we're spending more money on
government businesses than we take in.
So right now, if you look just on a spreadsheet,
we're roughly between the 800 and 900
million dollar structural deficit,
with our current funding of education
and what we have traditionally funded
through our general funding processes.
And what we have been doing in
Joint Appropriations Committee for the last two months,
and with this budget bill, is address that.
And from the House side,
at least for the next biannually,
if we're successful with the budget we've presented,
that we're able to accommodate that
and, to some degree, move the flag,
if you will, to start developing
reduced government spending and some
additional expenditures in revenue enhancements,
which will continue to reduce that
structural deficit over time.
- So what tactics were used to reduce
that structural deficit to meet a
balanced budget is this session?
- So for the next biannually, we have roughly
300 million dollars in cash on hand,
or we will.
- The carryover, if you will?
- Exactly, so if you combine both
education and the general side,
it's roughly 300 million dollars,
grabbing the 1% severance
and grabbing the .33% on the royalties.
That equals to about 300 millions dollars of biannually
so that brings it up to 600 million.
- And just to ask, this is money that
used to be saved.
Now, we're using it as diversions
to help fund this budget,
is that accurate?
- That's partly accurate.
I mean, back in the 90s it wasn't saved
and back in the 90s we used,
at least in terms of the 1%,
we used it to fund ongoing general expenses.
As we were able to have additional revenues,
then we moved it over and saved it
and, frankly, as you know,
in 2005 and since then,
up through just two years ago,
we had more than sufficient revenues
for the operations of government.
Now, so what we're doing is we're
going back to where we were in the 90s,
where we did not have the revenues to
meet our underlying obligations
and so we rely on that,
which is basically our savings.
So we're using our trusts and our savings
from those trusts to carry us through
this current financial problem.
- And then there's also some spending
out of the lizer account.
- Correct, and that's the other one-third.
It's about 250 to 270 million so if
you combine those together,
it covers that structural deficit.
And in the meantime, we have the
efficiency report that we're going to try
to work on reducing size of government,
we've got various other reductions
that came through through our Section 320s.
There was a new reduction in government
which is called a Section 312 for this
buying in and other specific cuts so that
we're moving in the right direction.
And we have House Bill 30,
which is another reduction in education funding
because you can't solve all the problems
without having a...
Basically, it's the old five-part plan,
which is now reduced now to a three- or four-part plan,
but over time, at the current processes,
and we'll have to see because we got
a third reading to go tomorrow
and then we'll have Conference Committee
and there was some new additions
and there were some new cuts last night
until about 10:30 at night.
But the plan's in place that we can have a
balanced budget and that we can begin to
work down on this overall structural deficit.
- Representative Burkhart,
before we get into the prison discussion,
which you're well-informed about for sure,
is this a solid strategy, in your view,
that the Joint Appropriations Committee is taking?
You were part of the decision-making process?
- Yes, very solid strategy.
Plans for the future, sets us up for the next budget,
which I think we need to do in this one.
We have to remember we'll have future budgets.
I think it's an excellent strategy.
We know where the money is and we'll use it appropriately.
- Alright, let's turn to our talk to
discussion about the penitentiary,
the state penitentiary in Rawlins.
Representative Burkhart, when we left a year ago,
there was a lot of discussion on
maybe the state will have to build a new prison.
And we're, in fact, showing our viewers now
some of the pictures that we took on a tour,
which you were, I think, about an hour
in front of us, Representative Nicholas,
last year of the prison.
And on the face of things, there were some
serious issues at the state penitentiary,
but it's been decided, it appears to me,
that a new prison's not required right now.
Is that correct?
- That would be accurate, correct.
In 2016, there was a task force to study the prison
and that task force received recommendations
from a consulting engineer that repairs
would be about 87 million and,
at that point, you start thinking,
"Well, are we better off repairing or rebuilding?"
In the past year, in 2017, JAC,
Joint Appropriations Committee,
was given the task of, "Let's look at this again.
"Let's get a peer review,"
and we contracted with a,
I guess you could call them forensics engineers,
who do this, evaluate sick buildings, bad buildings,
and got an estimate of what they
felt it would take to repair,
which was approximately 7.5 million.
- Did that surprise you given the
numbers you had heard before?
- Surprise wasn't exactly the right word.
I would say shocked when it's a
ten-fold decrease almost,
and we sat down and had long, frank discussion
with them and they gave us very good
engineering logical reasons why
and how they came to their estimation,
and that was a deciding factor then.
You mentioned a tour,
we went on the tour at that JAC meeting,
to, at that JAC meeting, decided to go
with their recommendations.
As a committee recommendation,
we continued down that path and I think
one of the important things they said was,
"If it's not broke, don't fix it."
- Something's broke, though, from the visuals that I saw.
- Parts, yes, but other parts, no.
And the analogy I've used is I think most of us
have a little crack or two in our driveway,
but we're not willing to replace it for that crack.
We may repair the crack and watch it,
and some were things that depend.
There were some things that we considered
and the engineers considered to be
a little more cosmetic than structural
so we went after the structural problems,
what sets the base and the foundation for the building.
And right now they're proceeding with that work.
- Representative Nicholas, you also
had a chance to tour the prison,
as we noted earlier.
You on board that that amount of money now
is going to be adequate with repairing
what was a real serious concern a year ago?
- I've toured it several times
and each time we go back,
in particular when you have the engineers with you,
you learn more about what you're looking at
and what is a risk and what is a catastrophic failure,
what can be done to fix the problems that are there.
And so, today, we've appropriated roughly,
I think, almost 13 million dollars
from the beginning, from the get-go,
up until now through direct appropriations by us
for major maintenance.
And the WJE Report pegged it that
that's roughly what it will cost,
and so we're kind of pretty close
to what those estimates are.
And now, as you keep going back,
and Don and I receive weekly reports
on what work is being done, what new problems arise,
and that's rather remarkable because
at least once a month we get a new
surprise of something showing up.
But none of those things have been
significant enough to warrant reexamination
of our game plan.
- Drainage issues, soil issues, all of those things.
- Yep, broken sewer pipes and just
all kinds of different things that, roof issues.
And the folks at the pen are in a
tough situation because they have to
have double people on duty for all the work done,
and so to fix a problem,
what would normally take two people
takes five people or six people,
and so they have time constraints on the work.
Part of those contractors are working
through the middle of the night
in order to get their work done.
It's expensive because of the mechanisms
and because security's the most important
component of it and our prison folks have
done a wonderful job with accommodating it,
trying to get this thing fixed,
and trying to save the building.
And all reports indicate now that
that will last another 15 or 20 years at least
if we do this right.
- We have about a minute left.
The legislature is deciding to save
ten million dollars a year.
Is that per biannually or per year.
- Per year.
- Per year to put on a savings account
for a new prison down the road, correct?
Stacking concerns at the prison.
Has the Joint Appropriations Committee
addressed that directly relative to cuts
that the Department of Corrections
had to incur in previous budgets?
Is that something that you're confident
is being addressed, Representative Burkhart?
- We believe it is.
They've done some work giving raises to the
lower levels where they felt they needed to
increase their compensation a little bit.
And I think it's working,
they've done it throughout their system.
They came to us and asked for some more money
and they had a good case and we gave
them some more money to do that.
We'll have to see how it goes.
They'll come back in a year and show us
statistics on retention of workforce
and recruiting new workforce.
So we'll see, but yeah, while the raises
may not look like a lot to some people,
I think they're significant for the
corrections officers at the penitentiary
and the other facilities.
- Alright, and Representative Nicholas?
- Just in a nutshell, because they have
a lot of vacancies they have extra cash,
and so they came to us and said,
"We wanna get pay raises, but we can
"get pay raises through the '19, '20 biannually
using our own dollars."
And that's roughly 2.1 million dollars,
but to carry out those raises for the biannually,
we needed to appropriate about an additional
1.4 million dollars to sustain those pay raises
and typically it went anywhere between
.75 to a dollar an hour.
And so, like I said, it doesn't look significant
until you see the total number of dollars,
but we're hoping that that will be sufficient.
They're still under-staffed and they've
been paying a lot of overtime,
so we're hoping that they'll be able to
beef up their staff, reduce their overtime,
and thereby stay within the budget they're provided.
- It's going to now be an interesting week
here at the legislature as amendments
still come forward in the House,
same thing's happening over in the Senate,
then potentially the real interesting discussions
and Conference Committees to iron out the budget.
- It'll be interesting.
- More late nights in front of you?
- Absolutely. - Yes.
- Well, Chairman Bob Nicholas
and Representative Don Burkhart,
thank you so much for joining us
on this segment of Capitol Outlook.
We appreciate your time.
- Thanks for having us. - Good to see you again.
- On now to a profile of Representative Lloyd Larson.
We had a chance to visit with him before the holidays
and he had some interesting comments
on what it means to run for the legislature.
That's next, stay with us.
(upbeat music)
- It's our pleasure now to be joined on this Capital Outlook
Profile, Representative Lloyd Larsen
who hails at Lander.
We're in the middle of your wood shop here.
You represent House District 54, welcome.
- Thank you.
- Representative Larsen, tell me,
where are we at here?
This obviously is a great hobby of yours.
- It's more of a release.
I don't think I'm really good at anything
other than perhaps making sawdust, but it's a,
- You're short selling yourself.
I've seen some of your work.
- I'm not really short selling myself.
I can come out here and just sweep the floors
and be as happy.
I'm not really one to sit in the house
and watch television or anything like that,
so through some spare time, this is a good place to
free your mind and smell wood.
- You live on the southern edge
of the Wind River Indian Reservation.
You know that I have also lived most of my life
on the other side of the reservation.
You also are the chairman of the
Select Committee on Tribal Relations.
Lots of issues still today with the tribes
that are maybe not settled.
Tribal liaisons have been an issue for the state
for quite some time.
Why is that?
Why has that been a hard program to
make run smooth, if you will?
- I would take even one further step back from that
and say a lot of the state government
relations with the tribes have been difficult,
and why is that?
And I think it's because we oftentimes
still fail to understand
the fact that they're a sovereign nation,
and so when we work with them,
given they're citizens of our state,
but Congress, when they were put there,
they were granted some special, pretty unique rights
and if I were a member of either one of those tribes,
I would defend those rights
as rigorously as they do.
And so when our state agencies,
for example, sometimes provide services of the state,
they're providing those services through another government,
so they'll go through the tribal councils.
And it's not one, it's two.
Getting back to your question on the tribal liaison,
sometimes I think we have failed to understand
on the tribal side as well perhaps on the state side,
what is it that a liaison should do?
Senator Case and I a couple of years ago
kind of changed the statutes,
defining what a liaison done
and what the responsibilities are
because we felt like
the way it was set up is the state says
Eastern Shoshone Tribe, send us,
here's your funding, send us the liaison.
Well it's the governor's liaison.
And the purpose of that liaison is to represent the governor
in how he relates to issues that are on the reservation,
that exist between state agencies
or the executive branch or the legislature
and those tribes or that tribe.
If it's Eastern Shoshone or the Northern Arapaho.
And so it really should be the governor
that is selecting who he wants
just like any other member of his cabinet or his staff.
So we changed that and we have it now to where the tribes
will submit two or three names,
but it's the governor's job to pick who that will be,
and then, you know I always envisioned it
as something that, you know,
if you have some struggles with the Department
of Family Services and the contract they have
with the Northern Arapaho tribe in compliance,
maybe with an audit or placement of children
or perhaps the ICWA, the Indian Child Welfare Act,
that the governor could go to his liaison and say,
"We're struggling here.
"Can you go identify with the tribe
"and see what that issue is
"and come back and report to us
"and work with our state agencies
"to see how we can resolve or mitigate
"the problem we've got."
That's how I see the liaison working.
- But funding for those positions has been cut.
- But funding for those positions has always been a struggle
and as we,
- I mean, and I want to interject,
the priority, then, of those positions, has been reduced.
- The priority of the position,
and that really came down last year to funding,
and it really came down last year to
the way the legislature viewed those positions.
I recall the question on the floor
the year before that,
saying, "Why do we need two liaisons?
"Won't one liaison work?"
And my response was, "Well why can't Colorado
"and Wyoming have one governor?"
- Competing interests, different interests.
- Well they're different nations.
They're different governments
and we're different states
and we wouldn't expect the same.
So you need to have a liaison that can represent
the governor's interest to each tribe.
- Discuss for me Representative, if you will,
the confusion that you helped mitigate to some extent
in the Joint Appropriations Committee,
on what St. Stephens School is.
- St. Stephens School has an interesting history.
Chairman Nicholas, who chairs the JAC,
pointed out that when he was a young boy
it was actually a Catholic school
and he went, I think elementary
or part of his junior high school there,
but then it became a Bureau of Indian Education School,
like a Bureau of Indian Affairs,
it's a federal school run by the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
Bureau of Indian Education schools
have separate funding, it's federal funding,
and St. Stephens was getting all of their funding from there
It's significantly less than what the state of Wyoming
funds state schools, their state K through 12 school at.
- Back to the camel decisions, then.
- Back to the camel's decision.
When Fremont County, an old Fremont County legislature
by Dr. Harry Tipton was in the legislature
and it's when Fremont County,
the reservation was part of his district at that time,
before they redistricted,
he looked at St. Stephens and said
those are Wyoming citizens too
and they're not getting the education
that they really deserved,
and so he came forth with a bill
and the legislature agreed with his position
that they should be funded,
they should have the same access to education
as any other child of the state,
and so what Wyoming does is they
look at what the federal government,
the Bureau of Indian Education is funding St. Stephens at
and then they supplement that
to bring it up to the same level as what
Wyoming schools in a geographic area are being funded.
- And there were some questions on enrollments
and was there enough, et cetera,
that you helped resolve.
- Well enrollment on the reservation is an issue.
We've got St. Stephens, Arapaho,
Wyoming Indian High School all their own districts on that.
- Let's go there for just a moment.
Let's talk a little bit about consolidation.
I think that you might say
there's opportunities for consolidation in your county.
- You think?
- Given the number of school districts that there are
both on and off the reservation.
Your thoughts about consolidation.
- When we moved to Wyoming in 1980
and I'd come from one of the largest
geographic school districts in the lower 48 in Utah,
which was the San Juan County School District
and I'd seen all of the school districts in Fremont County,
I just didn't understand it.
I couldn't comprehend why we would need so many districts
in one county.
As I've aged and gotten older
and I understand that they like the local control.
I would be one that would argue
that you lose local control if you would
consolidate the districts.
Consolidating districts does not mean that you
close down schools and ship everybody to one
centrally located school, it just means that you,
- Shoshone, for example, should have its on high school.
- Shoshone would not have to go to Riverton.
Or Pavilion wouldn't have to go to Riverton or Lander.
That wouldn't be necessary,
but you'd have a superintendent for the district
in Fremont County.
- And a business office.
- A business office.
And the key I think to success
is to make sure that you have
proper representation on the school board.
The school board is so critical
in the success of any school district.
We've had some challenges with school boards
in Fremont County.
We've gone through a lot of good administrators
in some of our schools districts because of
the concerns that some school boards have had,
so I think it actually broadens out the base
and gives a more level opinion
of what the administration's doing
if you have all of the schools represented.
We can't do that legislatively,
we can suggest it.
That's something that really, that consolidation
is a local effort.
I'm not seeing a lot of appetite for that.
- Now what brought you to Wyoming?
Why did you come here from Utah?
- I'm a southern Utah boy.
My wife's a Missouri girl.
We met, I went to a trade school back in Missouri.
We met, my father had moved to Rock Springs
to take a position with the company that
serves the oil industry
in the mid-70s.
When I finished up with school in Missouri
I worked for a while in Saint Joel, Missouri,
had the opportunity to come here,
always wanted to get back west,
and opportunity unveiled itself to move to Lander.
My brother had already moved here.
We worked for a number of years
for the same company,
then my brother and father and I decided to
hang out our own shingle
and went into business in 1983.
My dad lived in Rock Springs
and my brother and I lived here in Lander.
We worked together every day for 30 years.
About three years ago we sold the business.
We still work for the same company.
- Oil and Gas Construction.
- Oil and Gas Construction.
We love Fremont County, we love Lander.
You know, I fully expect to be buried in Lander.
Our children were all raised here.
It's a great place to be.
Can't think of any other place I'd rather be.
- And you made a decision to run
for the Wyoming legislature.
- I did.
- Why?
- Interesting story.
My brother and I are very close.
I think I have more respect for him
than probably any person
that I've ever been associated with
and growing up, he's four years my senior,
and growing up he was always,
we fought a lot physically,
but he was always very kind to me.
- So you were typical brothers.
- We were typical brothers.
- My brother would agree with that.
- I think so.
And I always trust his judgment.
And this is a long answer to your question,
but I've always been very interested in politics.
Tried to be involved civically.
When Representative Del McOmie,
who had served House District 54th remarkably
for 10 or plus years.
I was in my office one day
and my brother come in and he says,
"Representative McOmie is not gonna run again,
"you need to run for that office."
Had never really given it much of a thought.
Went home that night and thought about it more
and thought about it more
and you know,
it was time to shut up and put up.
- Or file.
- And file.
Anybody that's ever done that, you know,
you feel like you're dancing on the stage naked, because,
- You just scared away a lot of folks
from running for the legislature.
- What am I doing to, you know,
and it's not a personal decision,
it's certainly a decision that you make with your wife
and your family, and they've been supportive.
We're not, we're kind of private people.
- Representative Larsen, I've said before on this program,
the effort and the exhausting effort
you put it on Joint Appropriations Committee
could not be overstated,
and it's quite a lot of work that you have to do
even to get to this point where we are today.
So it's a pleasure visiting with you.
- Thank you.
- Thank you very much.
And it's now time to begin our weekly conversation
with the leadership of the Wyoming legislature,
Speaker of the House Steve Harshman
and President of the Senate Eli Bebout.
Welcome back to Capital Outlook.
- Thanks for having us.
- Good to be here.
- Late night last night.
Some late nights I think in your immediate future,
but I appreciate your time with us today.
Lots to talk about,
and there's some budget issues to talk about,
but one issue I want to start with is,
does the state of Wyoming have a role
in saving Wyo Tech over in Laramie?
The trade school that is now,
potentially may close down,
but there are opportunities with Laramie County
Community College and maybe the state of Wyoming
to do some work.
Does the state have a role in helping Wyo Tech survive?
Mr. Speaker, let me start with you.
- Well I don't know what that role might be,
but I think we oughta at least ask questions
and say is there a way that,
this is an important,
it's been an important part of Wyoming for decades,
and I don't think any of us have the answers on this deal.
So we don't know if there's a role,
but I think we owe it, I think, to our people,
all the work we're trying to do to diversify and grow,
and these are good jobs.
A lot of these kids who come out of that,
they're instantly hired in the industry in Wyoming.
But we oughta at least ask the questions, you know.
Is it an opportunity for the state
to kind of grow in that area and do that
or is there a way we can help,
you know, bridge that to another private buyer,
that'd be great, I think.
So we're continuing to talk about it.
- Been in Laramie a long time, Wyo Tech has.
Mr. President, what are your thoughts?
- Pretty much would agree with what's just been said.
You know we talk about with economic development,
we look at recruitment and doing all those different things
but what about retention?
Here we have a real viable entity
that creates a lot of good paying jobs
and there's an opportunity there
to keep it here in the state,
we gotta give it a full court press.
I would lean towards having the private sector get involved
and do it, but of the timing issues,
as I understand it, there's like $20 million
worth of latest stage equipment over there
that could be utilized.
The owner of that equipment now would be glad to transfer
rather than tear it out and sell it on Ebay, if you would.
So there's a lot of synergy there to move it forward.
Private sector would be my first choice,
but we can't just walk away,
we gotta be involved, we gotta try to help,
and ultimately what the legislature will do,
we'll set up maybe a loan to assist it
as they develop their business model and move forward,
but it'll go to the governor's office
to make that decision and we've gotta take that,
or like any other opportunity like that.
Let's just don't walk away from something.
Let's give it a full court press,
try to make it work, see if we can help.
- Let's move on to the governor's ENDOW initiatives.
It's along the lines of, certainly of economic development.
Where does the legislature stand as we speak today,
we're a day before this airs,
so we're visiting on Thursday.
Where are the ENDOW bills in the legislature
and what's their momentum?
(laughs)
- We know where they are, they're in the Senate.
But go ahead.
- There are a couple, you know, all the block chain,
online, all those business kind of things
are in the House, moving quickly through the House,
lot of excitement, frankly around the world.
We have people from around the world flying into Cheyenne
and I think MSNBC,
- CNBC will be here.
- CNBC is gonna be out here, thank you and so we've got,
there's a lot of buzz right now about that.
And I think, and that's all hooked in to the other,
the big really four ENDOW bills
are all starting in the Senate
and I think, so President Bebout can tell you their status.
- Senator.
- Well there are four bills, actually five bills,
but to speak to the block change,
you know, that's an important thing for our state,
and you know we are one of the,
if not the leading state in the country
to be able to have some good, responsible discussion
about it, and have some bills moving forward.
I was just telling the Speaker that about 10 minutes ago
I signed those to committee to give them a high priority
and they passed the House overwhelmingly
with a huge super majority,
so we're gonna get right on those.
We should, I think it's part of economic development.
As to the other four, actually five bills,
you know we started in the Senate,
we had some good support on the introduction votes,
you know we're gonna work them very hard.
I think I'm committed to the ENDOW Initiative,
the governor's been leading it,
and we've been working very closely with the House
and the Speaker to make sure these go through
and we're bringing them up today.
You know one of them has already passed,
that was the one on the airline.
I'm committed to trying to do what we can
for airline service.
It's a critical part of what we heard
from the ENDOW committee.
We're talking about workforce development,
we're talking about connectivity.
We're talking about entrepreneurial,
Build Wyoming, if you will,
not Build Wyoming, but Start Up Wyoming.
And then we're talking about international trade.
So those are the bills that are in the Senate,
I'm supporting all of them.
Hopefully they will come out of committee
and move forward and we'll send them to the House
and we'll be able to move forward
on economic development and diversification.
Huge for our state.
If not now, when?
It's not easy, but we've got to try.
- You feel there's momentum, Mr. Speaker?
- I think there is.
There's a lot of scrutiny by members, as it should be,
and so we're gonna have those discussions.
They'll be robust and open
and we want people to stay involved with that,
and let their representatives know their thoughts on that.
But I think we really do have some opportunities
that I think we can kind of continue to leverage,
and I think as much as anything you start this,
you start spreading this good news, you know,
and it starts feeding on itself,
and I think we got a lot of advantages here
and we want to make sure we're kind of working together
to not only make sure everybody knows
what those advantages are and sell them,
but I think, you know,
kind of coordinate and spread this work,
make it more effective.
- One of the things too that's so important, I think,
when you look at our state
and you do it as individuals or businessmen,
you know when you have tough times,
and we're certainly having tough times,
it's difficult to take money out of savings,
whether you're a businessman or as a state,
and to try to be proactive and say
now what can we do to get through this period
and maybe broaden or diversify.
I've had to make that decision as a businessman.
You need to do that, you need to have that discussion.
You need to be forward thinking,
and that's the hard part because we should have scrutiny,
but to do nothing would be a real disservice
to the citizens of Wyoming.
- I want to let our viewers know that just before
Capital Outlook this evening on Wyoming PBS
we had a 30 minute Wyoming Chronicle show
on the state of aviation in Wyoming
that really dove into the ENDOW proposal
surrounding commercial air service.
And that show is available online
if our viewers want to understand more
about what's being proposed.
Want to move on to school construction,
and this really came to pass in the Senate on Wednesday.
Mr. President, the Senate seems to wanting to put the breaks
to capital construction as it applies to schools.
- There was an interesting debate last night
and there was a particular amendment
sponsored by one of my senator colleagues
from Natrona County that said we shall do no more
school capital construction
and I wasn't sure how the Senate would react to that,
but what the debate in the Senate was is, you know,
with the shortfalls we have in terms of revenue
and with everything going on,
maybe now is not the time to be building new schools,
maybe we should concentrate on major maintenance,
which is huge, it's in there, and components.
And the money was left in there to do that.
They just, the Senate just took at position that
right now, for at least this next year
before we come back in the next session
that there will be no school capital construction accounts,
K through 12 being built, those schools being built,
new ones.
- Strong opposition to that,
especially from the group here in Laramie County
that's concerned about Carey Junior High School.
There were some other comments that were made
as part of that debate I want to visit with you both on.
One of them was that the current school facilities program
is gamed.
Senator Nethercott was very forceful
in her arguments about that,
that it is gamed and that the implication to me
was it hasn't been administered fairly.
Is that accurate?
- Well I think that everybody,
when somebody, it's not just about schools,
it's about things in your state,
and we are elected to represent our districts,
so it has happened, sure.
- [Host] Mr. Speaker?
- Well I think the process
has been worked on for two decades,
so the process of evaluation
and how schools rise to the top of the list,
I think it's a good process, okay.
That's all I think been vetted,
I think people around the state.
I don't know, I didn't hear,
I was down working on our end of the House,
the Carey Junior High issue was at the top of the list,
got pulled off, so yeah,
and then those monies got spread out across the state.
Did that go against the system of ranking
and doing all those?
Absolutely it did.
But you know, the legislature appropriates that,
those were positions that were taken by the Senate
and there was a compromise in the end,
but I don't wanna,
you know,
I don't want to say the legislative process,
the legislative process is what it is.
That sometimes get to be tough votes, you know,
but I will say the process in school facilities,
it's a good process and we're gonna,
we've done a lot of good across the state
and we'll continue to.
I mean, we're not gonna stop building buildings.
- Part of the debate of course
was that there's been different years,
and different lists and different priorities
and things change, and it's a moving target,
and so the most recent recommendation
from the School Facilities Commission
and the select committee, and the Speaker serves on it,
was to go a different direction.
And then what happened in the budget bill,
the Joint Appropriations Committee saw
a different direction to go.
And so the Senate has a debate about, well,
we think we oughta go back
to what the select committee recommended,
but it's long from being done
and we'll see what happens in the conference committee
as we discuss that issue.
- That'll be an interesting discussion.
Now I want to talk about the future of school funding
and then I want to get to the funding issues
concerning the University of Wyoming.
A constitutional amendment is being proposed
relative to how we're gonna build schools in the future,
which is, in my mind maybe, a step back to the past
when local communities bonded for schools.
Is that something you're supporting?
- Well I think that, is this Senator Scott's amendment?
- Yes.
- Friend of mine from Natrona County.
I think it's got a couple fatal flaws.
The biggest one is this power equalization across,
and I know he's trying to run a constitutional amendment
because the Supreme Court said it's unconstitutional
and particularly though, think how this works.
You're gonna power equalize, so people in Wheatland
vote to build a new school,
and they have their assessment ratios,
but it's not, this bill power equalizes them,
they don't have enough wealth in their local district,
so then there's gonna be one statewide tax
to power equalize,
so you're gonna say the vote of the people in Wheatland
are gonna raise taxes in Campbell County and Sheridan
and Fremont County.
I just don't think people,
I just think it's not gonna work,
and I, it sounds great and all that stuff,
but when you get down to how's this gonna work?
That actually, it goes into, morphs into
a different kind of state tax system.
I think it's gonna have a hard time.
It's gonna be tough.
- And I don't agree with him
on that particular one at all.
You know what he says about the power equalization
is a true statement except that now,
what happens it's done anyway
because we at the state are responsible
and pay for all these schools at the levels
that the are built at,
- [Host] Mandated to.
- Mandated to, so that happens.
What this does, the thing I like about it,
you have some local buy in.
Local people say yes it's important enough
to tax us at some level,
that we want to build a school.
You were in Riverton when we built the school there.
It was a tough vote.
We saw the need, the voters stepped up,
we voted for it, we want it, we build it.
So I just think we should have some local skin in the game.
It's a tough deal when you start messing with a constitution
and I understand the comments by the Speaker,
I just have a difference of opinion.
- Well I think that's all fine,
the local, quote "skin in the game,"
but I think when you say people in other parts of the state
are gonna have skin in your local game through their wallet,
I don't think that's gonna happen, and I think currently
it's paid by the extraction of minerals,
and I think to say that,
Mr. and Mrs. Jones, we're gonna raise your property tax
on your house or your business
in a community clear across the state
on an election you have no power to vote in.
- That's exactly what's happening now though
- No it's not.
- When you fund school capital construction,
it's coming out of LISRA,
that's taxes and money from all the people of Wyoming,
anyway, to be continued.
- It's actually coming from multi-national energy companies.
- We need to move on.
- That's where it's coming from.
- We need to move on,
but great discussion and I appreciate that.
- But I would say this,
and we have a bill, and the Joint Appropriations
approved it also to move some of this
school capital construction
to our permanent investment revenue,
and those are permanent funds of the state
that can provide for this,
and so you move to a real stable source.
It was coal lease bonus, that's gone away,
but I think we have a solution to it.
- Wanna ask, continue the capital construction debate
except as it applies to the University of Wyoming.
As you both know, in 2019 the university
is scheduled to break ground
on its facilities relative to the science initiative,
what has been discussed for a long time.
Should that project move forward?
Are you both committed to it?
- Oh absolutely.
- At $100 million.
- Right, and the money is in the bank,
it's been approved already by the legislature,
and it needs one more final authorization.
I think it's been in process now for six years, I think.
And so I think, again,
as we move forward into the future,
I mean we're moving into the future,
and really what is Wyoming gonna be like in 50 years?
I don't know that any of us,
but I think science and math and engineering
and all those things that we value
in our one land grant school are gonna be huge,
and I think these investments,
none of us can probably predict, but I do think,
smart kids, smart Wyoming kids
educated at the University of Wyoming are gonna be the key.
And so I think it's enjoyed support in the past.
- Mr. President, should we go ahead and construct it?
- Well the point about having a science initiative,
it is important at the university, we need to do it.
The concern I have, and I'm not supporting now
unless we figure out a way to come up with the money,
and that's the issue.
It's a good idea, it's a good project,
but it's a matter of timing.
And when we look at the demands on our revenue stream
relative to funding K through 12, our structural deficit,
all these different things going on,
other projects and other parts of our state
that are really important,
you know the state hospital, the WLRC in Lander,
the office building in Casper,
a road over in Kemmerer.
All these things are important.
So as I prioritize those lists,
quite frankly, in the timing right now,
the science initiative is not,
doesn't rise to the level of the other things.
The good thing we did do in this budget bill,
we paid for the capital.
I'm supporting that.
- And we have about 20 seconds.
UW housing plan.
Should there be a moratorium on any demolition right now
and are you accepting the UW housing plan
as it moves into the future with housing,
we have about 10 seconds.
- I support a moratorium, a slow down,
so we can get all the people,
and more people involved in this,
and I think the people of Wyoming need to weigh in on it.
- And we're gonna end on a positive note.
The Speaker and the President, I agree.
- It's gotta be quick.
Alright, there we go.
- I agree with him.
- Well Mr. President, Mr. Speaker,
it's been a lot of late nights
and a lot of late nights in front.
Thank you so much for taking a moment to join us
again on Capital Outlook.
And I want to let our viewers know
that this wraps up Capital Outlook week two
here at the Jonah Business Center at the temporary capital.
We'll be back next Friday night with the third week.
We'll know a lot more about Wyoming's budget then.
Stay with us and thank you for joining us.
- [Announcer] This program is supported in part
by a grant from the BNSF Railway Foundation,
dedicated to improving the general welfare
and quality of life in communities throughout
the BNSF Railways service area.
Proud to support Wyoming PBS.
- [Female Announcer] And in part by
the Wyoming Public Television Endowment
and viewers like you.
For more infomation >> YAMILETH es la Fantasía de los Amorosos | Enamorándonos - Duration: 8:41. 
For more infomation >> KARINA No Pudo Hacer una Suma y ROCIO fue Nominada | Enamorándonos - Duration: 3:35. 
For more infomation >> JUAN CARLOS el Sexólogo le dijo a DIMITRI tiene un problema s3xual | Enamorándonos - Duration: 5:53. 
For more infomation >> PAMELA Entendió que No le Importa a ESTEBAN se Fue | Enamorándonos - Duration: 3:36. 
For more infomation >> Eli Roth's Death Wish - Get A...
For more infomation >> Mercedes-Benz C-Klasse 180 CGI BLUEEFFICIENCY BUSINESS CLASS AVANTGARDE Command Navi-Clima-Cruise-H. - Duration: 0:59. 
For more infomation >> さくら/森山直太朗【卒業ソング/春の歌】歌詞付き 高音質フル (covered by クムリソラ-sora kumuri-) - Duration: 4:14. 
For more infomation >> Anitta & J Balvin - Downtown em Premio Lo Nuestro 2018 (1080p) - Duration: 2:42. 
For more infomation >> J Balvin, Anitta & Jeon - Machika em Premio Lo Nuestro 2018 (1080p) - Duration: 3:06. 
For more infomation >> フランス語会話 簡単・自然なフランス語vol.29 パリ散歩 - Duration: 0:59. 
No comments:
Post a Comment