Porter County

(1) Agincourt — Valparaiso, east of IN 49 between CR 400N/500N. Four two-story buildings, 157,000 sq ft each. $9M land purchase option with Redevelopment Commission. Status: PROPOSED. (2) Amazon — Portage. Reported in development. Details sparse. Status: REPORTED. (3) Provident — Chesterton, eight-building campus. Proposed May 2024. REJECTED. (4) Union Township — Petitioner presented at special public meeting May 13, 2025 at Porter County Expo Center. Plan Commission reviewing. Status: PROPOSED. Porter County Council and government have issued public statements committing to transparent data center review process.

HB 1405 (2019), signed May 5, 2019 by Gov. Eric Holcomb as Public Law 256. Codified at IC 6-1.1-10-44 (property tax exemption for enterprise IT equipment) and IC 6-2.5-15 (sales tax exemption for data center equipment). Created Indiana's data center tax incentive framework: sales tax exemptions on equipment and electricity, plus business personal property tax exemptions for qualifying data centers. Note: IC 6-1.1-12.3 (originally cited in some analyses) has been repealed; the active property tax provision is IC 6-1.1-10-44, as amended by P.L.256-2019, SEC.1.

HB 1405/P.L. 256 exempts: (1) Sales tax on data center equipment purchases — servers, storage, networking, cooling, backup power (IC 6-2.5-15-11); (2) Sales tax on electricity consumed by qualifying data centers; (3) Business personal property tax on enterprise IT equipment (IC 6-1.1-10-44) — duration set by local agreement between designating body and eligible business; (4) Sales tax certificate duration: 25 years (or 50 years if investment >= $750M) per IC 6-2.5-15-14. Qualifying thresholds are population-tiered (IC 6-2.5-15-10): $150M in counties >100K population, $100M in counties 50K-100K, $25M in counties <=50K. Investment must be met by 5th anniversary of certificate.

(1) PROVIDENT (Chesterton) — NO FORMAL VOTE. Developer withdrew Jun 10, 2024.
Chesterton Town Council issued public statement: "At its current scale, and especially at this location, the Town Council could never support this project."
Council members who spoke against at meeting:
- Jim Ton (R, D1, President at time): contrasted Provident unfavorably with Microsoft/LaPorte approach.
- Dane Lafata (D, D3): cited lack of environmental goals information.
- Jennifer Fisher (I, D5): criticized push-through approach ("That is not how we do business").
Other members: Erin Collins (D2, current President), Sharon Darnell (D4).
ALL STILL IN OFFICE. Contact via chestertonin.org.

(2) AGINCOURT (Valparaiso) — Valparaiso Redevelopment Commission gave $9M land purchase option. No formal rezoning vote yet.

(3) UNION TOWNSHIP — presented to Porter County Plan Commission at special meeting May 13, 2025. No vote yet.

Porter County Council and government committed to transparent process (Mar 24, 2025). Plan Commission formed data center study committee (Nov 25, 2025).

NO LOCAL TAX ABATEMENT FILED — no formal project petition yet.

Porter County Council issued a public statement noting their authority is limited to fiscal/financial matters (budgets, appropriations, bonding, abatements) but stated NO formal request had been made to the council regarding any data center project.

State Rep. Ed Soliday (R-Valparaiso) authored the original data center tax incentive bill (HB 1405) that created the statewide framework. Despite his district being in Porter County, no major data center project has formally entered the local approval pipeline in Porter County as of April 2026.

Any future project would be eligible for IEDC data center sales tax exemption and could petition for local property tax abatement through the standard Economic Revitalization Area designation process.

NO — no formal data center project has been filed in Porter County.

Porter County Council's public statement confirmed no formal request has been made. No community enhancement agreement exists or has been negotiated.

N/A — no formal project filed (see Q62).

N/A — no formal project filed.

N/A — no formal project filed. No job commitments exist.

N/A — no project filed.

Primary authors: Rep. Ed Soliday (R-Valparaiso, HD 4) — still in office as of 2026; Sen. Jim Buck (R-Kokomo, SD 21); Sen. Ed Charbonneau (R-Valparaiso, SD 5); Sen. Travis Holdman (R-Markle, SD 19); Rep. Erin Houchin (R-Salem, HD 47) — now U.S. Representative IN-9; Sen. Mark Messmer (R-Jasper, SD 48); Sen. Lonnie Randolph (D-East Chicago, SD 2) — Lake County. Co-authors: Rep. Earl Harris Sr. (D-East Chicago, HD 2) — Lake County; Rep. Todd Huston (R-Fishers, HD 37); Rep. Carolyn Jackson (D-Hammond, HD 1) — Lake County; Rep. Matthew Lehman (R-Berne, HD 79); Rep. Jim Pressel (R-Rolling Prairie, HD 20) — LaPorte County. Note: 3 of 12 sponsors represent Lake County districts.

House initial passage: 95-1 (Feb 19, 2019). Senate passage: 46-0 (Mar 25, 2019). Conference committee report adopted: House 82-8 (Apr 18, 2019), Senate 44-0 (Apr 18, 2019). Signed by Governor: May 5, 2019. The bill passed with overwhelming bipartisan support in all votes.

(1) Provident (Chesterton) — WITHDRAWN by developer Jun 10, 2024 (not formally rejected by vote). $1.3B, eight 150,000-sq-ft buildings. Chesterton Town Council publicly stated: "At its current scale, and especially at this location, the Town Council could never support this project." 60-75 residents gathered at Dogwood Park to oppose. Developer pulled application before a formal vote occurred. (2) Agincourt (Valparaiso) — PROPOSED. Valparaiso Redevelopment Commission gave $9M land purchase option. No formal rezoning vote yet. (3) Union Township — presented to Porter County Plan Commission at special meeting May 13, 2025. No vote yet. Porter County Council and government issued public statements committing to transparent process (Mar 24, 2025). Porter County Plan Commission formed data center study committee (Nov 25, 2025).

(1) PROVIDENT (Chesterton) — NO FORMAL VOTE. Developer withdrew Jun 10, 2024.
Chesterton Town Council issued public statement: "At its current scale, and especially at this location, the Town Council could never support this project."
Council members who spoke against at meeting:
- Jim Ton (R, D1, President at time): contrasted Provident unfavorably with Microsoft/LaPorte approach.
- Dane Lafata (D, D3): cited lack of environmental goals information.
- Jennifer Fisher (I, D5): criticized push-through approach ("That is not how we do business").
Other members: Erin Collins (D2, current President), Sharon Darnell (D4).
ALL STILL IN OFFICE. Contact via chestertonin.org.

(2) AGINCOURT (Valparaiso) — Valparaiso Redevelopment Commission gave $9M land purchase option. No formal rezoning vote yet.

(3) UNION TOWNSHIP — presented to Porter County Plan Commission at special meeting May 13, 2025. No vote yet.

Porter County Council and government committed to transparent process (Mar 24, 2025). Plan Commission formed data center study committee (Nov 25, 2025).

(1) PROVIDENT (Chesterton) — before withdrawal Jun 2024:
YES, public testimony at Plan Commission (May 16, 2024) and a crucial Town Council meeting (Jun 4, 2024). Residents testified about negative impacts: air, water, energy, wetlands, wildlife, home values, and mental health. Jenny Hansen (Dogwood Estates) wrote testimony about residents wanting to move if the project proceeded.

Town Council issued a public statement: "At its current scale, and especially at this location, the Town Council could never support this project."
Council members who spoke against: Jim Ton (contrasted Provident unfavorably with Microsoft/LaPorte), Dane Lafata (lack of environmental info), Jennifer Fisher ("That is not how we do business").
Sentiment: OVERWHELMINGLY AGAINST — led to developer withdrawal Jun 10, 2024.

(2) UNION TOWNSHIP — Porter County Plan Commission, May 13, 2025:
Special meeting for a different data center proposal. Plan Commission formed a data center study committee (Nov 25, 2025) to evaluate future proposals.

Porter County committed to transparent process for all future proposals (Mar 24, 2025).

YES — Chesterton publishes agendas and minutes.
Chesterton Agendas & Minutes: chestertonin.org/469/2024-Agendas-Minutes (2024 archive)
Town Council page: chestertonin.org — meeting schedule and documents.

May 16, 2024 Plan Commission meeting (Provident data center presentation): minutes available in 2024 archive.
Jun 4, 2024 Town Council meeting (council pushback leading to withdrawal): minutes available in 2024 archive.

Porter County Plan Commission: porterco.org — special meeting May 13, 2025 (Union Township data center). Porter County meetings available through county website.

NOTE: Chesterton's strong public statement against the Provident project is documented in the official minutes, providing a model for how a council can use the public record to express opposition.

TWO SEPARATE STATUTES, TWO DIFFERENT ANSWERS:

PROPERTY TAX (IC 6-1.1-10-44): NO clawback mechanism. The statute authorizes a local "designating body" (county or municipality) to enter an agreement granting a property tax exemption. The eligible business must invest $25M+ and pay wages at 125% of county average (Sec. 44(b)(3)-(4)). However, the statute contains NO enforcement, recapture, or penalty provision if these conditions are later unmet. The only protection would be terms negotiated into the local agreement itself — the statute does not require any.

SALES TAX (IC 6-2.5-15): LIMITED enforcement via noncompliance assessment. Section 15 requires an agreement with IEDC including annual reporting of taxes not paid. Section 18 provides: if IEDC determines a company is noncompliant with the agreement or chapter requirements, IEDC notifies the Dept. of Revenue, which MAY impose an assessment up to the total taxes exempted plus interest and penalties. The trigger is failing to meet the "qualified data center" definition (Sec. 10) — i.e., not reaching the investment threshold by the 5th anniversary.

CRITICAL OMISSIONS: Neither statute requires job creation targets, community benefit commitments, water use limits, renewable energy use, or any ongoing performance metrics beyond the initial investment threshold. There are no wage requirements in the sales tax statute. The property tax statute has a 125% county average wage requirement but no mechanism to enforce it after the exemption is granted. The first economic impact study (Sec. 20) is not due until 2030 — 11 years after the law passed.

2026 session reform bills: (1) HB 1210 (Rep. Ed Soliday, R) — PASSED, weakened. Original: data centers pay fair share of electricity costs. Senate version: $5M/year savings to ratepayers. Final (after private meetings with industry): 1% electricity savings, capped at $350K/year. Signed into law. (2) HB 1333 (Rep. Beau Baird, R) — DIED. Would have protected farmland from data center conversion by requiring agricultural zoning protections. (3) HB 1245 (Rep. Matt Pierce, D) — DIED. Would have required IURC to study data center electricity impacts on ratepayers. (4) SB 257 (Sen. Chris Garten, R-Charlestown) — DIED. Would have protected residential ratepayers from bearing data center infrastructure costs. (5) SB 79 (Sen. J.D. Ford, D-Indianapolis) — status unclear. Would require data centers to disclose water and electricity consumption. (6) HB 1043 — Would require DNR water consumption permit for large data centers. 2025 session: HB 1007 — ENACTED. Requires data centers to commit to paying 80% of generation costs for electricity. Pattern: 5 of 6 reform bills in 2026 died. The one that passed (HB 1210) was weakened from $5M/year to $350K/year in closed-door meetings.

No. Indiana does NOT require state-level environmental impact review for data center projects. There is no state EIS/EIR process equivalent to NEPA for private data center construction. Permits required: IDEM air permits for diesel backup generators (Title V or minor source); NPDES water discharge permits; stormwater permits. These are standard industrial permits, not data-center-specific review. Local ordinances are filling the void: Lake County (Aug 2025) adopted a data center ordinance requiring noise limits, setbacks, energy efficiency plans, water management plans, and decommission plans. Kosciusko County (Feb 2025) classified data centers as "exceptional use" requiring special permits. These are LOCAL responses to the absence of state-level requirements.

No. Indiana does NOT require data centers to report water consumption or use renewable energy. No existing statute or regulation mandates either. SB 79 (2026, Sen. J.D. Ford, D) would have required water and electricity consumption disclosure — status unclear/likely died. HB 1043 (2026) would have required a DNR water consumption permit for facilities using large volumes — status unclear/likely died. For context: IU Environmental Resilience Institute reports US data centers consumed 17.4 billion gallons of water in 2023, expected to double by 2028. A single hyperscale campus requires 200+ acres, 100+ MW of power (equivalent to 80,000 homes), and millions of gallons of water annually for cooling. Indiana is projected to need 426 TWh of data center electricity by 2030 — "more electricity than all 6.8 million Hoosier households today" (IU ERI).

UTILITY: NIPSCO (Valparaiso area).

No data center project has been formally filed in Porter County. NIPSCO's broader rate and GenCo filings (see St. Joseph/Lake entries) would apply if a project is proposed. Rep. Ed Soliday (R-Valparaiso) authored the original data center tax incentive bill.

N/A — no formal project filed.

N/A — no approval vote has occurred.

N/A — no formal project filed.

N/A — no formal project filed. No meetings to attend.

== ALL LEVELS ==
No formal project filed in Porter County.

== PREVENTIVE POLICY ==
1. Porter County should proactively adopt data center zoning standards and community benefit requirements BEFORE any developer approaches.
2. Learn from neighboring Lake County (Hobart) experience — data center accountability is harder to achieve after approval than before.
3. Monitor IURC proceedings on NIPSCO rate impacts, as Porter County is in NIPSCO territory.