Wyoming panel pushes forward on government data privacy rules

A Wyoming legislative panel gave a thumbs-up this week to a bill that would put guardrails on how state and local agencies handle your personal data, Wyoming News Now reports.

At a Tuesday meeting of the Legislature’s Select Committee on Blockchain, Financial Technology and Digital Innovation, members advanced a draft titled “Data privacy–government entities.” The core idea is simple: agencies can’t buy, sell, trade, or hand off your personal information without your express OK. If they collect or keep that data, they have to spell out how they collect it, how long they keep it, how they secure it, and how they use it—consistent with existing laws. There’s also a default three-year cap on retention unless an agency adopts a written policy explaining why it needs more time.

Not everyone loved the draft as-is. TechNet’s Andrew Wood praised the goal of “strengthening resident trust” but warned the bill could clash with public-records practices and urged Wyoming to mirror comprehensive privacy laws already working in other states. He argued government records often help with identity and fraud protection and cautioned against “unintended consequences.”

Money and logistics came up, too. Mike Smith from the University of Wyoming said UW’s systems are built to retain data, not regularly delete it; he pegged a redesign at roughly $800,000.

Another critique: the bill focuses on people, not companies. System engineer David Roland said businesses and organizations deserve protection as well. Sen. Chris Rothfuss, D-Laramie, answered that the bill deliberately centers individuals; folding in corporate data would make the proposal unwieldy.

“This is a slice of what probably is a bigger necessary policy,” he said.

Election data sparked debate. Joey Correnti IV argued the prohibition on transferring or selling personal data could sweep in voter rolls, which the Secretary of State’s office already distributes for $165 statewide. He also worried the three-year clock could gut historical voter archives. Rep. Mike Yin, D-Jackson, clarified the three years is a default—agencies can keep data longer if they adopt a policy that justifies it. Rothfuss added that public records still win out: if another statute makes something public, this bill steps aside.

In short, sponsors say the aim is transparency—making sure agencies can’t quietly pass along private data without explaining why.

“Now they have to justify why they’re releasing data if they don’t have statutory authority to already do it,” Rothfuss said. “That’s pretty darn good public policy.”

Lawmakers tightened the language with a few amendments: access rights now cover any current or former Wyoming resident; a resident’s legally authorized representative can act on their behalf; and the bill explicitly doesn’t apply to documents already covered by the Public Records Act.

With Sen. Tara Nethercott, R-Cheyenne, excused, the committee voted unanimously to send the draft forward. That makes it a committee-sponsored bill for the 2026 budget session. As Yin put it, the measure is about public transparency — “especially in places where it’s not public record.”