Setting the chessboard for the months to come in transpo policy
Editor’s note: This story was published in the January 24, 2025 edition of Indiana Transportation Insight.
Can you believe the first month of the 2025 legislative session is almost over?
You’ll see a lot about this session of the General Assembly in your favorite transportation newsletter, now that we’re in the thick of it. Several of our predictions are coming true – a road funding conversation, very large in scope, is scheduled for next week and will be peppered with difficult choices for the legislators. A lot of substantial issues are on the table, from Regional Development Authority regulations to restrictions on motorists and major infrastructure updates.
You wouldn’t know it, though, if you only paid attention to the House and Senate Democrat and Republican priority agendas.
The Senate Republicans are focused on property tax relief, Medicaid (of course), and creating more guardrails surrounding distribution and use of Indiana’s water resources.
A side note: While this latter priority has nothing to do with road funding, it does pertain to transportation. SB 4 author Sen. Eric Koch (R) of Bedford reveals that part of the impetus for the bill, which would require a utility or large private sector user to obtain approval from the Indiana Department of Natural Resources before proceeding with certain water projects, is Indiana’s status as a prime location for electric vehicle battery facilities and data centers, which are heavily water-dependent. SB 4 is the closest thing to a transportation priority bill in any caucus agenda this session . . . despite pre-session road funding concerns.
Senate Democratic priorities include maternal health, securing full funding for Medicaid, regulating utility companies, and safeguarding funding for public schools. So, both Senate Republicans and Democrats share a common omission in their priority lists: neither group addresses urgent transportation issues.
House Democratic and Republican agendas also do not mention transportation, despite ongoing discussions on Indiana’s infrastructure situation, especially with road funding. The Dems focus on property tax reform, state funding for public schools, and nixing Indiana’s childcare voucher waitlist, while the Republicans center deregulation of K-12 schools, standardizing health care pricing and billing, improving access to housing and . . . convincing Illinois citizens to cede from their “high-tax” state and join the “low-tax, low-cost” Hoosier State.
We also told you that the big-ticket items listed above were likely to supersede the information flow about road funding and transportation. So, we’ll serve as a guide to what’s happening and when Inside the Limestone for the issues that affect our readers the most all session long.
A lot has happened in the first few weeks of session, and there’s plenty more to come. Let’s review where we stand with transportation legislation.
HB 1461: If You Only Pay Attention to One Bill . . .
HB 1461 is the doozy on tap for next week. Authored by House Committee on Roads and Transportation Chair Jim Pressel (R) of Rolling Prairie, the bill represents Rep. Pressel’s “à la carte buffet” of road funding options.
This is a lengthy (37-page) bill, but standout items include requiring companies receiving state economic incentives to pay for improvements to state or local transportation infrastructure; allowing counties with consolidated cities such as Indianapolis to raise taxes on wheel and excise tax on their own to build, repair, or maintain roads and highways; communities being able to use a smaller percentage of state highway funds for road projects if their infrastructure reaches a certain quality level (this provision would be in effect starting 2026); allowing the state to ask the Federal Highway Administration for permission to toll interstate lanes without needing additional approval from the state legislature; splitting responsibility for bridge maintenance between counties and cities based on the size and location of the bridge; allowing counties to contribute property tax revenue for transportation projects, changing the rules for grant distribution for road projects so certain towns will gain larger slices of the pie if local government opts to adopt a transportation tax ordinance; requiring townships with extra funds to put those funds towards road and infrastructure improvement projects; allowing Marion County voters to vote on a tax to pay for road projects; and, finally, allowing counties to tack a fee onto deliveries to generate funding.
Whew! That’s not even every option in the bill. Rep. Pressel wasn’t kidding about that buffet.
HB 1461 is a major move that is sure to gain attention in the infrastructure sector. The provision granting Marion County the ability to raise property taxes that would be specifically directed to infrastructure funding is one of the least popular options. Rep. Pressel tells Hayleigh Colombo and Kayla Dwyer of the Indianapolis Star that he’s “trying to help [the counties] help themselves” by granting tools to locally solve infrastructure problems instead of, to quote House Speaker Todd Huston (R) of Fishers, “waiting on the Legislature to solve their problems.”
Chair Pressel also highlights the power this grants to Marion County voters. While it’s uncertain if pothole maligners would be willing to put their money where their mouth is, Rep. Pressel aims to empower counties and their citizens to address the severity of their infrastructure issues independently.
Readers of our sister Hannah News Service flagship newsletter INDIANA LEGISLATIVE INSIGHT know well that legislative fiscal leaders have told local government leaders since last summer that they should not be approaching lawmakers for more local funding until they have exhausted all local funding mechanisms, including local income taxes and the wheel tax.
As Dwyer and Colombo relay, Marion County officials believe they currently have about half of the funds needed to maintain and replace its infrastructure. The urban county currently is slated to spend $200 million; the county estimates it’ll need $400 million. If 50% wasn’t already scary enough of a deficit, some experts assert that the $400 million price tag won’t be nearly enough to cover the county’s needs. Indianapolis estimates that 40% of thoroughfares and 60% of residential streets are in urgent need of repairs.
As you might surmise, many Hoosiers aren’t fans of any approach that contains the words “tax referendum.”
Shortly after the news broke, Indianapolis citizen Michael Nolan wrote an angry op-ed for IndyStar in opposition to the potential legislation. He called out Rep. Pressel by name, lamenting that the Northern Indiana lawmaker “wants Marion County to address our potholes and maintain the country’s nearly 8,500 lane miles of roads by allowing us to raise taxes to meet funding needs.” He ultimately asserts that rural Republicans want to see counties – namely, Marion County, due to the “Republican-dominated state government[‘s] … Indianapolis bias” – reach into taxpayers’ pockets to put band-aids on Community Crossings instead of fixing it legislatively on their own.
Indianapolis Mayor Joe Hogsett (D) would be put in a difficult situation if Rep. Pressel’s bill makes it out of the limestone, as he’s decried the idea of raising taxes and the road funding formula’s reliance on them.
The argument has been for a while now that Marion County needs more assistance than it’s getting – that’s part of what the debate surrounding Community Crossings is centered on. Based on its current formula, Marion County received $5.01 per local vehicle mile while medium and smaller counties get, on average, more than $10. Mayor Hogsett doesn’t want dilapidated roads, but he also could take a political hit (though he is not expected to seek a fourth term) if he jumps on board with raising taxes as a solution. His rhetoric up until this point has espoused that
Marion County residents already aren’t seeing road revenue equitable with current taxation amounts.
The wheel tax, however, has been Hogsett’s line in the sand, and if faced with either raising the wheel tax or property taxes for roads, he may choose the lesser of two unpopular options. Indianapolis Chief of Staff Dan Parker – who formerly ran the city’s Department of Public Works – echoed Rep. Pressel’s verbiage, calling the idea a “tool in the toolbox.” A conciliatory provision is the voter’s choice, which may take some heat off Mayor Hogsett.
SB 377: RDAs and More
SB 377 is another bill to watch. Authored by Sen. Greg Goode (R) of Terre Haute and Sen. Jeff Raatz (R) of Richmond, the bill was scheduled to be discussed in the Senate Committee on Appropriations Thursday, January 16, but a one-two punch of the Medicaid bill freight train (SB 2) and the Braun Administration’s budget unveiling required an audible, punting the bill hearing to Thursday, January 23 as we were heading to press with this issue.
SB 377 would directly affect a major interest in the Hoosier transportation zeitgeist: regional development authorities. The bill would place more planning and review-based requirements for state agencies to obtain funding for a Regional Development Authority project. SB 377 also would offer parameters for prioritizing RDA projects. Finally, the measure would prevent the Central Indiana Regional Development Authority from expiring; in other words, RDAs would continue perpetually.
We’ve discussed RDAs in several previous issues, chiefly in the context of the Mid-States Corridor development (see our first January issue for the latest news on that project).
This bill is significant for both Governor Mike Braun (R) and those who oppose his transportation priorities. We portend considerable debate on this issue. Be sure to check out the next issue of your favorite transportation newsletter for a comprehensive breakdown.
SB 13 & SB 158: No More Wheelies!
Two Senate bills this session will once again tackle “spinning.”
In August, we covered “street takeovers” (largely in Indianapolis), which involve motorists performing stunts in a parking lot or streets (even temporarily shutting down entire sections of interstates), effectively blocking areas from regular traffic. These incidents bedevil Indiana State Police and the Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department as they result in the endangerment and inconvenience of other motorists, not to mention nearby pedestrians or bicyclists. How often this is an issue depends; the street takeovers tend to come in spurts.
One weekend saw six different takeovers with a single incident drawing over 200 cars. Once the police showed up, things got hostile, and participants pelted the officers’ cars with items. In another March incident, a street takeover in a parking lot on North Sherman Drive near East 25th Street in Indianapolis resulted in a 19-year-old sustaining grave injuries: a shattered jaw, broken hips, and a concussion. The individual’s mother shared with the Indianapolis Star that he is still undergoing surgeries to recover. The driver fled the scene; no arrests have been made.
SB 13, authored by Sens. Jim Tomes (R) of Wadesville, Dan Dernulc (R) of Highland, Rick Niemeyer (R) of Lowell, and Aaron Freeman (R) of Indianapolis, and SB 158, also authored by Sen. Freeman, would turn “spinning” into a Class B misdemeanor, making the penalties much harsher. If an individual is tangibly injured in an event, the crime becomes a felony. Perpetrators could lose their cars or incur jail time. As it stands, police have a limited number of responses they can take. Indianapolis City-County Council passed an ordinance in 2024 that hit offenders with a $1,000 fine for their first violation and then upped it to $2,500 if they were caught spinning again. Vehicles could also be impounded for at least a month . . . and local law enforcement was positively giddy the first time they invoked this option.
As for the odds of the bills being codified, preliminary committee meetings have shown that lawmakers are on board and believe penalties need to be increased . . . but SB 13 will need amendments to prevent it from being too broadly applicable. Sen. Liz Brown (R) of Fort Wayne, chair of the Sneate Committee on the Judiciary, expressed fears that police could arrest motorists involved in car crashes. She used her son’s experience as anecdotal evidence, citing an incident in which his car hit all four sides of a road barrier, but he was not trying to do a spin. SB 13 did pass out of committee in a narrow 5 – 4 vote.
Where To Next?
“We are on a roll so far! I hope we unanimously pass all bills this session,” Rep. Pressel stated, indulging in wishful thinking, before concluding the most recent House Committee on Roads and Transportation meeting this week. “Can we continue this streak next week?” he then asked, clearly referring to HB 1461’s imminent discussion.
We’ll keep you posted on whether this trend continues in the next committee meeting (spoiler alert: it’s doubtful).