Wildlife and natural resource funding amendments.
In one sentence
Not clearly identified in the stored source.
No additional limitations are listed.
Official record
2008 General Session Summary for SF0069 Bill No.: SF0069 Drafter: MDO LSO No.: 08LSO-0334 Effective Date: Enrolled Act No.: Chapter No.: Prime Sponsor: Select Natural Resource Funding Committee Catch Title: Wildlife and natural resource funding amendments. Subject: Wildlife and Natural Resource Funding Trust Account Board reporting and authorization requirements. Summary/Major Elements: Under current law legislative authorization is required for "large projects" (i.e., those for which funding exceeds $200,000) funded from the wildlife and natural resource funding expenditure account. Small projects are those under that amount and funding is continuously appropriated for those projects. This act: Clarifies that a project funded by the Wildlife and Natural Resource Trust Account Board shall be considered a "small project" if the total of all grants sought or previously awarded by the Board total $200,000 or less. Modifies the Board's legislative authorization to include that the Board may approve additional grants for a previously authorized large project not to exceed a total of an additional $100,000. Subsequent legislative authorization is required for any grant to a large project in excess of the limits of this additional amount. Comments: See related bill - Natural Resource Large Project Funding Bill, SF 63. Final action on this bill was not taken at the time this summary was prepared. Should changes be made to the bill upon final passage, an updated summary will be transmitted to all legislators.
Public statements
Last checked Aug 11, 6:56 PM
Why they voted this way
The speaker explains that the current report is a compromise because previous versions were rejected. He details how the final version retains the Senate amendment while modifying the House's financial threshold and reporting requirements for large projects.
H50
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker argues that the bill is necessary to allow large projects like Kirby Creek to proceed without annual delays by authorizing spending up to $100,000 above initial legislative approval. They also note it enables matching federal grants received early in the year before the next session.
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker supports the bill to ensure that large projects over $200,000 are reviewed again by the Senate if they require additional funding in subsequent stages. This prevents multi-year projects from exceeding their initial scope without further legislative oversight.
S02
Why they voted this way
The lawmaker supports removing a provision that allows installment payments on motor vehicle taxes because current short-term plans do not work well and conflict with other tax collection legislation.
If a lawmaker is not listed, we couldn't find a published reason.
Wyoming roll calls
9 roll calls
Official activity
Changes
2 stored
Adopted 2nd reading by CHILDERS
Adopted 3rd reading by LARSON