WILL COLTERYAHN: ON THE ISSUES

We can lower property taxes by fixing policies that shift costs from large corporations onto regular homeowners.

• Make big-box chains pay their full assessments. In Indiana, a Walmart can be taxed like an abandoned K-Mart. States that have closed this loophole have seen homeowner property taxes fall by 5 to 12%.

• Stop giving away the tax base. TIFs, abatements, and other special deals allow billion-dollar companies to avoid taxes that would otherwise support their communities. In towns like Avon, ending these giveaways could mean around a 15% reduction in costs for homeowners.

• Require corporate landlords and developers to pay their share. When businesses contribute fairly to the communities where they operate, homeowners can see bills that are 15 to 30% lower without cutting the services they rely on.

​​

These changes do not deter companies that depend on Indiana's location and workforce. Even the Republican Governors Association has noted that tax breaks have no impact on business recruitment.

​

My approach is simple: focus on what Hoosiers consistently say they want, real relief for regular people.

Indiana's utilities operate as state-regulated monopolies, which means state government has enormous influence over what utilities can charge Hoosiers.

​

Right now, customers aren't just paying for the electricity they use. We're also paying for lobbying, executive compensation, and major capital projects.

​

In 2025, lawmakers passed a bill co-authored by my opponent that allows utilities to charge current customers for research and development on future nuclear reactors intended to power data centers. That research can cost millions of dollars, and ratepayers are required to cover those costs whether the reactors are ever built or not.

​

There is a practical solution: utilities should only be allowed to charge us for the electricity we actually use.

Eliminating these extra pass-through costs could lower the average utility bill by around 30%. This approach puts affordability first and keeps utilities accountable to the people they serve.

Indiana’s surge in data centers isn’t about Hoosiers using more internet or AI. It’s happening because the legislature created incentives that make Indiana unusually attractive.  It also leaves Hoosiers unusually vulnerable.

​

Data-center operators receive decades-long tax abatements that can save them billions. Utilities aren't required to charge them for all of the electrical infrastructure they consume. Indiana's zoning and environmental rules are also centralized at the state level, leaving towns with little ability to reject a data center or establish stronger environmental standards. In communities like ours, large areas zoned for residential use can be converted with little local say. Unless these laws change, data centers will continue expanding because the state has made it easy and profitable for them to do so.

​

My approach is straightforward: let communities decide what gets built, under what rules, and at what cost.

​

If a town wants a data center but also wants enforceable water-safety standards, it should have that authority. If residents want compensation or a negotiated tax structure, they should be able to debate those decisions locally. And if a community doesn't want a data center, it should have every right to say no.

​

Government should stay small and accountable, not become increasingly centralized to benefit the party in power.

​

Hoosiers also deserve stronger protections from big-tech data collection. Indiana currently puts the burden on individuals to opt out of tracking, giving large technology companies tremendous power over the collection and use of personal information. That data can influence pricing, advertising, and the algorithmic content people see.

​

We should reverse that approach. Companies should only collect personal data when someone explicitly chooses to opt in, as other states already require.

​

Finally, mass-surveillance tools like Flock should not exist. These systems raise serious constitutional questions, and continuing to fund them risks wasting taxpayer dollars on technology that courts may ultimately restrict. These cameras are also privately owned and can store or sell personal data. No private business should have that kind of control over people's personal information. What our state needs is a local-control approach focused on protecting our communities, our privacy, and our environment.

I've spent my entire career in social work, much of it inside state government, working to make sure Hoosiers with disabilities and seniors can live in their homes and participate fully in their communities. Today, that system is at risk.

​

My opponent has publicly discussed returning people with disabilities to state institutions as a cost-saving measure. That approach failed for decades. These facilities were chronically underfunded, leading to abuse, neglect, and the isolation of people who fought hard for the right to live, work, and participate in their communities. We cannot go back.

​

With the Department of Justice no longer enforcing Section 504's protections against forced institutionalization, states must take responsibility for safeguarding people's rights. We need people committed to protecting the dignity of the Hoosiers they serve.

At the same time, the legislature has repeatedly cut Medicaid funding for home- and community-based services. Those cuts are already harming seniors and people with disabilities. Home health aides are being reduced. Food and medication deliveries are disappearing. Supports that allow people to work and live independently are being stripped away.

​

The result is simple: Hoosiers who rely on these services are losing the very tools that keep them safe, healthy, and connected to their communities. This is a moment when Indiana must strengthen, not dismantle, the systems that allow people with disabilities and seniors to live with dignity.

​

I've spent two decades making these systems work, and we can strengthen them without increasing the burden on taxpayers. When we fund oversight, agencies can prevent fraud before it happens, reducing costly appeals, shortening investigations, and protecting the dollars meant for care. Proactive monitoring saves money, safeguards services, and helps keep Hoosiers where they belong, in their homes and communities.

Recent changes to Indiana's tax system have given large corporations additional breaks on equipment while shifting more of the burden onto homeowners and local governments.

​

When that tax base disappears, communities have fewer resources for police officers, firefighters, and other essential services.

​

I don't believe first responders should go without so multimillion-dollar corporations can increase their profits. I want to reverse these policies and make sure businesses that rely on our infrastructure and emergency services pay their fair share

Right now, many Hoosiers distrust their elected officials. Unfortunately, our system gives them reasons to feel that way.

​

Indiana has a part-time legislature, which means lawmakers often have full-time careers outside their elected roles. That experience can be valuable, but it also creates clear risks. Legislators can find themselves voting on bills that directly benefit their employers or their own financial interests. 

​

The legislature has an ethics committee, but it is made up entirely of other lawmakers, with no requirement for bipartisan balance or independent oversight. Even the appearance of bias erodes public trust and is clear evidence of our need for stronger safeguards.

​

Those safeguards start with greater financial disclosure so Hoosiers can see where legislators' money comes from and where it goes. We also need an independent body that proactively monitors potential conflicts of interest rather than relying on lawmakers to voluntarily recuse themselves. Every session brings examples where a vote appears to benefit a legislator financially. That’s not acceptable.

Hoosiers deserve a government that is transparent, accountable, and worthy of their trust.

Most Hoosiers are busy, overworked, and trying to keep up. They deserve a representative who is accessible and actually listens.

​

I will hold monthly town halls throughout the year and weekly town halls during the legislative session, with the goal of being one of the most responsive elected officials in Indiana. 

​

The more I hear from my neighbors, the better I can understand what matters to you and the better I can work to make your life easier.