Property taxes and local control dominated discussion Saturday at the State Legislative Breakfast, hosted by the Crawfordsville/Montgomery County Chamber of Commerce at Crawfordsville Middle School.
The panel featured State Sen. Spencer Deery, R-District 23, and State Reps. Jeff Thompson, R-District 28, Matt Commons, R-District 13, and Beau Baird, R-District 44. Lawmakers are entering the final week of the legislative session.
SB 1 debate centers on long-term impact
Thompson opened his remarks by explaining how his perspective has shifted over time.
“When I was first elected, my mind would think two, four years about what the right policies are,” Thompson said. “The longer I am there … my brain thinks farther and farther out. A lot of my mind thinks, what’s this look like 20 years from now? I won’t be, of course, at the State House 20 years from now. But that’s how my brain tends to think.”
He reiterated his support for SB 1, last year’s property tax overhaul, and described what he sees as structural problems in the current system tying property tax rates to local income tax distributions.
“You’re incentivized, then, to keep the property tax rate as high as you can because it affects your local income tax distribution, doesn’t it?” Thompson said. “Doesn’t make any sense, does it?”
He called the measure a shift in authority.
“This is a local government freedom bill is what it is,” Thompson said. “Because right now I can tell you what happens. I know in one county that I happen to live in, for every $10 raised in local income tax, three goes to the county, seven goes elsewhere. You know who tells them to do that? It’s the legislature. … Let them make the decision.”
Crawfordsville Mayor Todd Barton directly responded, agreeing with Thompson’s long-term framing but disputing the local impact.
“Representative Thompson, you made the statement that you’re thinking out 20 years, and I agree with that. I couldn’t agree more,” Barton said. “That drives what we do in local government, leaving it better than we found it, and thinking about the next generation.”
He then added, “Unfortunately, Senate Bill 1 has left a colossal mess for the next generation from our perspective. It’s going to have to be figured out. Long after you’re gone, long after I’m gone, we have a hole that we’re in.”
Barton said the income tax and debt concerns cited have not reflected Crawfordsville or Montgomery County’s experience.
“I’m a little baffled by that because that has not been the experience in Crawfordsville or Montgomery County,” he said. “I would love to see some more data related to that, show me how that works, because that has not been our experience at all.”
He also pointed to earlier provisions that would have required annual adoption of local income tax rates, saying credit was due for changes made this session.
“S&P had made it very clear this is a disastrous policy for the taxpayers who are going to pay that bill in Indiana,” Barton said.
Shortly after Senate Enrolled Act 1 passed in 2025, S&P Global Ratings, which provides independent credit ratings and research, warned that the law “creates uncertainty” for local income tax-backed debt.
Closing his remarks, Barton referenced earlier comments from Deery about state control.
“[He said], we want to be a state that controls our own destiny. Why would we subject ourselves to the whims of Washington, D.C.?” Barton said. “Now you know how we feel in the local government sector. We want to control our own destiny, not be subject to the whims of the Indiana General Assembly.”
Thompson responded that he believes SB 1 reduces legislative control over local decisions.
“We tie the hands of local government terrible right now,” he said. “Senate Bill 1 frees it up. Goes the other way. Look at it.”
SB 277 draws opposition, split response
Environmental policy also drew public concern, particularly Senate Bill 277, which changes certain regulatory language within the Indiana Department of Environmental Management and includes provisions related to federal standards and PFAS.
Farmer Kenny Cain spoke in opposition, urging lawmakers to send the bill to a study committee and raising concerns about water protections.
Deery, who voted against the bill, cited concerns about limiting Indiana’s authority.
“We as a state should be determining our appropriate level of environmental regulation, not the federal government,” Deery said. “I don’t understand why we would tie ourselves to the wings of Washington, D.C.”
He added, “We are the people’s body, and we’re supposed to be in charge, and we should be willing to kill a bill just because — and not let it live just because it was suggested by the executive branch.”
Baird, who chairs the House Environmental Affairs Committee, said most of the language changes are administrative and noted that numerous mandatory provisions remain in statute. PFAS language added in the House is expected to be discussed publicly as the bill advances.
Baird also provided brief updates on other measures, including Senate Bill 55, which would establish a state agricultural checkoff program if federal programs end; Senate Bill 56, which removes a five-year practice requirement for out-of-state veterinarians seeking Indiana licenses; and House Bill 1361, which consolidates fertilizer regulations into Indiana code.
Child care, voting, National Guard addressed
Child care funding was again raised by Kelly Taylor of the Montgomery County Community Foundation, who cited provider closures and the need for continued support.
“I want to bring that issue back up today and make sure that we don’t leave here today without reminding you how important this is to not only our community but communities throughout Indiana,” Taylor said.
She noted that more than 200 providers have closed statewide with more to likely follow, warning of impacts on workforce participation and kindergarten readiness.
“We’ve partnered with our city of Crawfordsville, with Montgomery County government, and several local employers trying to address this issue locally,” Taylor said. “But we still need the assistance of local government, especially around CCDF vouchers.”
Deery said Senate Bill 4 includes temporary language aimed at stabilizing funding for children currently enrolled and said child care will likely remain part of future budget discussions.
“It’s absolutely an essential issue,” Deery said. “You talk to any employer, what do you need? I need more workers.”
Audience members also asked about the federal SAVE Act and a proposal to shorten Indiana’s early voting period. Deery responded he does not have special expertise on federal legislation and wants his public comments to be informed. On early voting, he noted challenges in recruiting poll workers and encouraged volunteer participation.
House Bill 1343, concerning the Indiana National Guard, prompted questions about law enforcement authority. Commons, a co-author, said the bill mirrors policy in Massachusetts and would allow Indiana to access additional federal funding.
“We’re talking about the Indiana National Guard here. We’re not creating a new unit,” Commons said. “It’s purely in the instance of some kind of emergency.”
Lawmakers are expected to work through amendments and conference committee reports before adjournment later this week.
Some information for this article came from Whitney Downard at the Indiana Capital Chronicle https://indianacapitalchronicle.com/2025/09/30/credit-rating-agencies-flag-property-tax-bill-for-creating-uncertainty-for-local-bonds/
