The EPA hands over Indiana coal ash regulations, data center tax breaks approved, and Secretary of State candidates urged to support voter bill of rights.

From the television studios WFYI public media.

It's Indiana Week in Review for the week ending September 18th, 2026.

Indiana Week in Review is produced by WFYI in association with Indiana Public Broadcasting stations.

Additional support is provided by ParrRichey.

Indiana is at the forefront of a federal deregulatory push of environmental protections.

Officials from Trump's Environmental Protection Agency visited the state Tuesday to announce efforts to put Indiana in charge of issuing coal permits, managing the disposal of coal ash.

Ben Thorp has more.

The coal announcement comes as the Trump administration announced a repeal of rules limiting greenhouse gas emissions from gas and coal power plants.

EPA Deputy Administrator David Fotouhi says giving Indiana regulatory authority will safeguard human health and the environment while saving money.

It allows Hoosiers to decide what is best for Indiana instead of folks sitting behind desks.

In Washington, D.C., Braun Mike Braun told reporters the state will still hold companies to high environmental standards.

I think to just assume that there would be anything being laxed or done at a lower level of concern or quality would be a bad assumption.

Indiana has more coal ash dump sites than any other state.

So would Indiana strengthen its environmental regulations?

It's the first question for our Indiana Week in Review panel.

Democrat Lara Back.

Republican Chris Mitchem.

Laura Merrifield Wilson, political science professor at University of Indianapolis.

And Samantha Horton, reporter and newscaster at WFYI.

I'm Jill Sheridan, managing editor at WFYI.

So, Lara, can we expect effective regulations around coal ash permits in Indiana?

Well, I think that does remain to be seen.

I mean, there was some really interesting response to this, but Indiana does not have the best history and or track record of policing ourselves and being proactive when it comes to invite to regulating and and managing the environment.

I mean, I'm thinking back, 20 years ago to the former IDEM commissioner, Tom Easterly, when there was like a toxic waste pile named after him and, in the region.

So we don't we don't have the best track record.

I think the biggest issue for me on this is that in some of the reporting that came out is there has been legislation that the legislature has passed.

And, Chris, you probably know more about this, that Indiana can not have stronger regulations than the feds.

So my question there would be, how are we going to deal with that?

And how are we going to make sure this has some teeth behind it?

So no more stringent than as what she's talking about as far as, you know, if if we did want to impose like stricter regulations, we would not be able to do that.

And the federal government has, has I tried to lower the emissions rates and the greenhouse gas emissions that were, that were proposed this week as well.

No, I, I totally understand that concern.

And I think when it comes to no more stringent, I think that does apply to your actual policy.

But I don't think that applies to kind of the administrative oversight and the administrative, burdens, not the right word, but kind of how much you pay attention to these different applications when it comes to what you can do with coal ash and things like that.

And I think IDEM actually has a really good track record when it comes to that.

we have a couple clients that we've worked with that have had IDEM permits go through the process, and it is intense.

The idea that you just, you know, put together a pretty PowerPoint and they'll give you whatever modification you want is not the case.

They have hired engineers, they have hired geologists.

And I've just been on a couple of email threads where it's they're using numbers and letters I've never heard about, but they have dedicated people there that know the topics working with, you know, the people who are applying for it, and making sure that they really do drill down to the specifics and making sure that they meet all the regulations and things like that.

So I do think if the federal government comes in and lower standards, that doesn't mean you have to lower the amount of scrutiny that you give to each application.

I think they've done that very well.

And then ultimately, you know, I think Commissioner Woods further deserves credit just because, he has stressed the importance of efficiency and the lack of red tape.

And as we know, the longer you wait on things, the more administrative costs build up, the more cost of red tape comes and builds up.

And so I think that ultimately can benefit both businesses and Hoosiers when it comes to saving costs in the long run.

I mean, that is why we heard that it would save costs, that it would lower utility bills because of the deregulation piece of it, but also maybe because Indiana is continuing to operate coal plants.

when some of the coal plants would like to stop.

Yes.

And we have the most coal ash of any state in the country.

And by doing this, we join nine other states.

we have a lot more oversight in terms of environmental regulations.

So it's not just a deregulation piece, it's a decentralization piece giving states more rights and responsibilities here.

but we would be allowed to issue our own permits with regards to the, CCRs.

And I think that does give the state a lot of latitude.

The question is, will it be effective when we know there's a potential cost savings?

Is it still effective in terms of what it's supposed to do for the environment?

And for me, it's a difference between principle, which is the the overarching theory.

Right.

And the actual practice.

What will come of this?

This policy is.

Something that the states dealt with for, you know, quite, quite a while because we have so many coal ash dump sites and we've seen, you know, the impact of having coal ash in the environment.

It's happened in Governor Braun's own county Jasper County in southern Indiana.

He seems very aware, though, that this is an important issue.

Yeah.

And I mean, I think looking at it, I think the biggest concerns too, with this is I've covered Superfund sites in the past.

And I look at, you know, that could be lead contamination, other things as well.

But that's the question I have, is if you're giving the state the authority to manage this, when something goes wrong, who's going to be held accountable for it?

Will it be the state or the federal?

You know, because in the past, it's just been the federal and we've relied on federal dollars to help clean up some of these sites.

Now, if you're if the feds are handing this over to the state, will there be a push to make the state be footing that bill and can the state foot that bill?

be the question, too, I mean, that would not be a money saving.

Yeah, that's a good point.

Maybe we could use some of our surplus money for that, I guess.

But, no, you bring up a great point.

I think the other part is as well as is that Indiana is in the bottom of environmental quality.

I mean, we are at the very bottom.

We are below all the states we make fun of.

and so the fact that we could even go further down is very concerning, especially with those cleanup and remediation.

My grandmother lived in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, and she lived just down the road from a Superfund site.

and the health implications on the people who live near there because of the copper mines and the mines just dumped right into the lake, that would leech into Lake Superior.

the health implications are really terrifying and really expensive.

So you might save money in the long run, but then you're also paying money on those health care costs for people.

Who need it.

Certainly a lot's changed, though, in the last couple of decades.

And do we need to, you know, really, Governor Braun saying that we don't expect that we would, you know, not be covering all of our bases.

We are going to be on top of this.

Yeah.

No, he yeah, he has a history of actually, I think being more conservation minded than previous governors before, especially, you know, with his operation down there in Jasper when it comes to the large forestry down there as well.

I think he understands the importance of that, that place in the environment, but also just to the state geography as a whole.

And then going back to Sam's point about the, you know, the federal government versus the state government responsibility, it will be really interesting to see how those two things correspond when it comes to if it does result in increased costs at the state level, how do utilities recover those costs?

Right.

If they are responsibly, ultimately responsible for what happens to these coal ash ponds?

You know, we've seen in the legislature, they continue to get more and more, permission to recover costs from ratepayers, including coal ash ponds.

So it will be interesting to see, with Governor Braun really starting to prioritize affordability and holding utilities accountable, do these rules kind of reflect that?

A little bit of you will be further responsible for your coal ash, and how does cost recovery play into that?

It is an interesting topic this week.

It's time now for viewer feedback.

Every week we pose an unscientific online poll question.

This week's question Should Indiana strengthen coal ash regulations?

Vote yes or no.

The last question posed to viewers should a voter's ballot be counted if the clerk makes an error?

Answer 94% saying yes and 6% saying no.

If you would like to take part in the poll, go to wfyi.org/IWIR and look for the poll.

A new data center project planned in Indianapolis will receive major tax breaks.

Zak Cassel reports the City Development Commission approved the move this week.

The Metropolitan Development Commission approved two tax breaks for the data center project.

The company Sabey and its tenant together plan to invest more than $4 billion.

The first tax break is for real estate, a 60% break for ten years.

The second gives them a 90% tax break for equipment over 15 years combined.

It's about $240 million in savings.

The company will pay $53 million in local taxes during both abatement periods.

The data center will host cloud computing in government and corporate operations.

So, Chris, do you think these tax incentives are a surprise at this time?

I don't think they're necessarily a surprise just because you see similar deals in Indiana and across the country, for that matter.

But I do think, you know, when you have $1 billion company coming in and you are a local person in that community, and you see hundreds of millions of dollars worth of tax breaks that could be a little surprising.

I think the common person would ask, what the heck, you know, do they need these for?

But ultimately it is an economic development tool, right?

and that's what the state empowers cities to do this, to give these breaks, to attract businesses.

We've already seen from this one, you know, it's going to attract full time jobs.

A lot of the unions around in and around Indianapolis were supportive of it because of that.

And all of the community benefits that they plan to bring in and use the tax abatements to that some of these, what they call good neighbor provisions, I thought were interesting was, you know, they're going to probably put $5 million towards Indianapolis roads.

Who could be against that with the condition of our roads?

they're going to build, you know, an aquatic center over there.

They've promised to invest further in like, the library and schools and things like that.

So I think those in favor of the tax abatements kind of look at it as a of a misdirection of taxes.

So rather than, you know, providing tax breaks that typically just go to like the general Indianapolis budget operating thing.

This diversion kind of makes sure it goes to the local community.

Right.

It goes to those in Decatur Township rather than just to kind of the Indianapolis fund as a whole.

So, again, I do think whenever you're talking 100 millions of dollars towards billion dollars, the companies people will have questions.

But unfortunately, it is kind of common practice now when it comes to economic development and making sure that, you can be as attractive as you want to these, to these data centers.

And Indiana is in itself very attracted to data centers as well.

our climate is really good.

We have a good obviously a good business community here as well.

So you would think that, you know, the abatements aren't as high here, and the state does provide the city to go even further than what Indianapolis did.

So I think it's good that they were kind of more measured in the breaks that they gave.

So, I think ultimately it's going to be really good for that community.

But I have heard the argument, though, that, you know, these data centers do want to build here.

Why are we giving them such incentives?

We should maybe consider that, and especially with the pushback that a lot of these data centers have received.

Share in community.

Yeah, absolutely.

With the pushback.

And I think Chris makes a good point.

He says the average person thinks, oh, we're giving money to these billion.

Well, I think more than the average person is asking that.

I think policymakers I think there was one member on the MDC who wouldn't vote for it because he said, I don't believe in giving tax breaks to that.

So I think it's to me there's a couple elements of it.

One is these companies, not all of them are like Google that are coming in and really investing in the community, being coming apart of the community.

I think these companies have really missed the mark in this.

The other part is, okay, yeah, you're going to build an aquatic center.

You're going to do this.

Well, right now Decatur Township has a referendum for basic operating expenses for the school because you've got Senate enrolled Act one, which is just stripping away so much of what these local governments rely on.

So, yeah, you could have an aquatic center, but right now the school is needs the money so they can operate, you know, to educate our children.

So I think that's that's an issue with it as well.

But then even taking a bigger step back into public policy, you have a city council that voted 24 to 30.

I'm sorry, it was a 24 or 20 3 to 1, I can't remember.

There was one holdout vote.

there was one holdout vote on a moratorium for data centers.

But yet you have the is a city body of unelected people.

No offense to them who are voting for tax breaks, and I doubt any of them live where any of these data centers are being built.

So that also becomes a challenge, and it makes you take a step back at unit gov and say, is unit gov really functioning the way it should function now?

because of the engagement around this, I think it's going to become even more complicated and more challenging for elected officials once we see midterm results, because we know that this is likely going to be an issue in the midterm.

And now you're going into mayoral elections.

And so you've got 17 counties in Indiana with moratoriums.

You've got a number of big cities which have either a moratorium or have changed their zoning ordinances.

So from a public policy perspective, we may need to look at institutions like unit gov and say, is this really the direction it needs to go in for a modern city in this current climate, because we're not in the 60s anymore?

Oh my gosh, I know that was.

A long that was a long answer to a very short question.

But she makes a good point.

There are so many moving pieces in this data center.

You know, question right now across the street, lots of communities have put in moratorium, but and this does seem like a bit of a bit of a conflict for some people.

It does.

I mean, you people just saw a moratorium passed in Indianapolis in the they hear tax breaks being given.

And that's a really confusing thing to hear.

Then it's, you know, kind of it's two messages.

I know there is a question and like you mentioned earlier, then if these data centers really want to come here, would they be able to pay for this all themselves.

So I think there's a lot of those questions there.

You know, tax breaks are I've covering economy in the past.

They are a typical thing in projects.

But data centers are just falling into this new realm and they're just so contentious.

And you're seeing people on both sides of the political spectrum pushing back against some.

So there is I think it's just a it's an outlier, I think.

And the typical thing we're seeing when we talk about tax breaks being a common practice, this is just something I feel like it's going to become a separate, conversation point.

Do you think that's part of the problem or is that this is kind of the Wild West?

Oh, I think so.

And and part of that is that the numbers don't match the narrative, because in economic development, yes, you usually do use tax breaks.

So the reason why I do that is because you're competing for something that you want.

But all the public opinion data suggests that most people are opposed to data centers.

And they say like, okay, during this abatement period, we're talking about $240 million that won't be coming in.

We're giving all these tax breaks.

I think Chris described it better than anyone on the Development Commission dared to say, well, it's money coming specifically to this community.

It did, because then at least you understand, okay, where's the investment?

Right.

Why would we give tax breaks on something that supposedly most people don't want to see?

And there is a lawsuit from Decatur Township, 30 million.

Yes, ten year period.

And that's sizable.

I, I to me it's just it's very clear like what people say they want.

And then what people are getting is not connected.

Then the I just wanted to add in about the tax incentives, you know, I think of a company like Lilly which has gotten tax incentives over the years.

But Lilly is an economic engine for not just central Indiana, but really for the entire company and their country.

And they're doing groundbreaking work.

Right.

But they also have a foundation.

They have an endowment.

They are so deeply embedded and intertwined in our city and in our state that most people, any you know, if you go to a park that's been impacted by, by Lilly.

And so I think that is where a lot of this comes from, especially with distrust of the data centers right now.

And you mentioned Lilly.

They are currently the highest paying property tax payer in Marion County.

Even with the abatements, this property is going to be ninth.

And then when the abatements are over, they're going to be the second highest paying taxpayer in Marion County.

So you talk about SEA1, the stress on property taxes.

The way to solve that is to grow and to continue to grow and increase your, your revenue streams.

And I think that's what the community is.

Ultimately, you just don't capture that growth right now, right?

That's the problem.

But then you got to have a you got to have a bond referendum to make your budget match.

You're not okay.

Yeah.

It's tough.

Well, Indiana Secretary of State candidates are being challenged to sign on to new voter Bill of rights to protect voters and make the process easier.

In Indiana, advocacy groups including the League of Women Voters and Common Cause Indiana gathered at the state House this week to outline the proposal.

Ben Thorp has more.

Voter advocacy groups issued a number of recommendations from same day voter registration to keeping Indiana's primaries open.

State Republicans, including Secretary of State candidate Max Engling are pushing for closed primaries.

Julia Vaughn is the executive director of Common Cause Indiana.

She says their proposals are about improving the state's abysmal voter participation.

We've ranked 50th for voter turnout twice and never gotten out of the bottom third for all states for voter participation.

Vaughn says their group plans to ask Secretary of state candidates which of the proposals they will support if elected.

The group does not endorse any of the candidates.

So, Laura, can we expect that Secretary of state candidates in Indiana would sign on to a proposal of this type?

You know, I don't know that, but I will plug the Indiana Debate Commission has a, debate for, the Secretary of state's.

Yes, that's on October 7th.

And we solicit questions from voters so people could submit that one.

I will say there are nine states that have closed primaries.

There's eight that have semi-closed primaries.

We could join those 17 states.

I know that's one of the big concerns is if we go to a closed primary system.

But I think part of doing that is a question of the voter turnout piece and the Bipartisan Policy Center suggests about 5% of nonpartisan, independent voters participate.

When you have open primaries, they're not otherwise involved.

we have an entrenched two party system.

I think if you look at primaries as the party selecting their candidates, then maybe a closed primary ideologically fits that perspective.

But having the open primaries right now for many voters in Indiana is the only opportunity they have to have a say in a competitive election.

So many of the general elections just generally are not competitive.

it's a switching into something like that would be really interesting to see.

I also believe the late state Senator Jack Sandlin had introduced legislation on switching to closed primaries.

It didn't gain a lot of traction.

I don't know, in this legislative session if there's an appetite for it, but it's really the legislators that would be making some of these decisions that are proposed.

I mean, that is we've heard a lot of calls you know, since redistricting, since what happened and recent, May primaries about this closed primaries, which is one piece of the voter bill of rights that we that they would like to see, you know, not happen.

what do you think the impact would be?

I mean, like you mentioned, we already have one of the worst voter turnout rates in Indiana.

Yeah, it's I don't even think it's even, nonpartisan voter.

It's, it's new voters to people who are interested in getting into any time you make it more restrictive or less access, less people are going to participate.

That's just part of, you know, that's been studied and seen.

And so I think that's something that we have to look at is if you close it, less people are going to participate, less people are going to have a say.

And what's the consequence of that?

You know, so I think that is really telling, you know, if people want to close it because they want to keep it internal or they feel like it should be, you know, within a party to decide that's an option.

But like, like I said, it's going to I think you're going to see even the numbers become a little less what we've heard, you know, from our I mean, this is an extremely interesting secretary of State race that we're having in Indiana this year.

and we've heard from, you know, candidates that are interested in doing a voter bill of rights, some of these measures that, have been proposed, you know, same day registration, no guns with the polls like these types of these types of things, you know, with this race in mind, we could possibly make some changes to improve voter what we possibly could.

I mean, I think if, I think if Beau Bayh or I think of anybody other than, the Republican nominee wins, whether it but hopefully it'll be Beau Bayh or, you know, even if you see Greg Ballard on the independent side, I think that the legislature will move to make that, an appointed seat immediately.

I think they'll be one of the very first things I do, just like what they did with Superintendent of Public Instruction.

they.

Drive to the governor's office.

They try with lieutenant governor.

Yeah.

That effort didn't.

Yeah, that's very true.

But I mean, we do.

We have some of the worst turnout.

I think 2014 was the worst turnout on record here.

and the whole primary conversation to me is it's sort of silly because you do have, a closed primary and that's your party convention.

and, and the other part on that, too, is that when you have gerrymandered gerrymandered districts and the way that they are and they are so gerrymandered in some of parts of the state, you don't get the best candidate when you are in the primary process.

You just don't because you're going to get more extreme people and so on, on all sides.

And so I think that, from a just from a purely policy standpoint, you know, good government is good politics, for good politics is the government.

I just to me, it this is a conversation that drives me crazy.

We should be encouraging more people to vote.

And that is I think there's a lot of people who don't.

Well, are some of these ideas, you know, plausible and should we, you know, focusing on the secretary of state office and voter rights, I mean, make this more of a focus for these candidates and for the office.

Yeah, that.

That.

The kind of the platform that they proposed, it kind of hits all three sides of it.

Like, you know, I don't think Beau Bayh would appoint it because I don't think he wants to be the guy leading a, you know, an independent commission for gerrymandering just because in any state, if you're the minority, you're going to be advocating for the independent.

It's not a Republican Democrat thing.

It's a who's in the.

Minority for independent, redistricting.

Yeah.

Pretty soon, maybe on.

The congressional level, we'll see.

but and then you got the close primary, obviously, you know, Max Engling's not going to sign on to that one because they're advocating for open.

So I, I'm not sure if anybody's going to sign onto that platform in particular.

They kind of hit a wide swath of, of issues.

but yeah, going back to the closed primary thing, you know, people a lot of people like to say when it comes to voter ID laws, you know, you're suppressing the right to vote.

I have a hard time subscribing to that.

I think just show your ID like you do at, you know, the bar or something like that is kind of a similar thing.

But when you comes to close primaries, you literally are saying and there's an increasing trend of people in the country further identifying as independent.

Right.

And I think the latest numbers in Indiana shows around 35%, 40% of people either identify lean left, lean right, but not necessarily with a party closed.

Primary quite literally shuts those people out, saying you're not allowed to have an opinion in the primary process.

So when it comes to voter turnout, trying to get more people, on the ballot, that will increase voter turnout.

Having further say, I think that probably goes in the opposite way that they want to go.

I do want to get to our last issue, a recent sweep of U.S.

immigration and Customs Enforcement resulted in the arrest of 426 individuals in Indiana.

Caroline Beck reports on ICE calls Operation Safe Community Indiana, primarily targeting Indianapolis.

ICE activity shot up in the Indianapolis metropolitan area beginning the week of August 30th.

Videos made the rounds on social media depicting ICE agents making stops and arrests.

The increased ICE activity also impacted local schools serving higher populations of mixed status students.

One West Side school, which asked not to be named due to safety concerns, told WFYI there was a decrease in attendance during the increased ICE presence.

According to an online statement from ICE, the five day stint was similar to those in other major metropolitan areas.

So Sam ICE has said that they're working with local and state officials.

But we did hear from many representatives that they had no awareness of this activity before.

Yeah, I mean, working with is a very broad term.

So I could just be not obstructing enforcement.

You know, there's a lot that it could be.

It could just be, you know, then it could be actually partnering in a sweep or, whatever enforcement they were doing in that community.

I think the big thing too, is we're seeing, you know, this is a large number of arrests that were made.

I think the big questions are what?

Like what were the arrests?

And like, how many of them actually have a criminal record and then two in the criminal record, how many are actually violent?

Because I think that's the big thing too.

Is this whole argument in immigration conversation.

signage.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Yep.

Well, that's Indiana Week in Review for this week.

Our panel has then Democrat Lara Beck, Republican Chris Mitchem, Laura Merrifield Wilson, political science professor at University of Indianapolis.

And Samantha Horton, reporter and newscaster at WFYI.

You can find Indiana Week in Review's, podcast and episodes at wfyi.org/IWIR or on the PBS app.

I'm Jill Sheridan, managing editor at WFYI.

Join us next time because a lot can happen in an Indiana week.

The views expressed are solely those of the panelists.

Indiana Week in Review is produced by WFYI in association with Indiana Public Broadcasting stations.

Additional support is provided by ParrRichey.