Have a penalty, Gerald. We did gain a little bit of money last last meeting, so we're making progress. So so, you know, please, of course, turn your cell phones off. Pretty easy agenda today. We'll we'll start with, senate bill four seventy two. I Thank you, Representative Layman. If you wanna make some remarks, of course, you're welcome, sir, and welcome to Ways and Means. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I do believe there is an amendment to four seventy two that is it deals with the second complete second half of the bill. So if you wanna talk about the amendment or should I talk about the bill
that and then what the amendment is gonna do? I want you go ahead and and then talk about the amendment to you understand the amendment? Yeah. That that's fine. Of course. Yeah. So what four seventy two is is a product of an issue we've currently been dealing with on the AI task force cybersecurity. A couple years ago we passed a pretty sweeping cybersecurity bill. In that bill at the time, we said the local governments, may have a provision looking at what they're doing on cyber, but they they need to probably be doing something. Now a couple years later, we're changing that may to a shall.
They shall implement best practices around their cyber liability. Part of it is is we do share a lot of data with locals, and we wanna make sure that they are stepping up and having this the the type of systems they should have. So they need to be uniform, best practices, and then and then, provide us with that data. That's pretty much the first part of the bill. The second part of the bill was we're also hearing from, municipalities and some schools that are saying, hey. This cyber coverage is becoming more and more expensive. And so will there be ever a time when we could have some help with
possibly, paying for some of this that maybe is defending a claim or whatever? And I'm it'd be in the insurance business. I can tell you that is one of the fastest growing, exposures and and claims. So the second half of this bill was creating a, like, a grant program that through fines and other things through the AG's office, they would create a fund and then that fund would be used over time to help pay some of those expenses. That fund is not funded in the budget or anywhere. And I think at this time, there's an amendment to just remove that,
from the bill. I think there's some areas of right now within the AG's office and other ones when it comes to, egregious practices, business practices second half of this bill. Everything to do with the grant program or the trust that fund is created would be exempted out. Thank you. Any questions for Representative Layman? Hearing none, Representative Jordan, I believe you have an amendment, sir. Yes, I do. It does two things. It's as, leader layman highlighted, consistent with what we've done most with most bills coming through here. It takes out the fund that isn't gonna be funded through the budget.
And the second thing is is as we've tried harder and harder to not have, incentives, for the AG or other offices to get funds to fund things through litigation, etcetera. So, that takes out the, language that it would be funded through, AG action. So, basically, as you can see from the amendment, it takes out this the, second half of the bill. Thank you. Any questions, members of committee? Can we take the amendment by consent? Consent? I'm not by consent. Any further discussion on the amended bill?
Representative Schlager? Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thanks for your presentation, representative Lehman. Can you tell me why we're exempting the Indianapolis Department of Public Utilities? Specifically, no. I do think there are some quasi, entities and I think they they were this was taken out in the Commerce Committee. They are, through an agreement with the city, already providing that data and that information. So they were taken out of this bill. I'm not quite sure I understand. They're they're sharing with the city They have a they have a contract with with the city of Indianapolis Annapolis or Marion County,
the the UNIGOV or whatever it is. So they're basically in compliance with this and felt that by their by their referencing where they're at in statute, that there was no reason to put them into this statewide when they're specific to that. This was an issue they brought up with this bill was heard twice in commerce and they were they brought this to our attention the first time as presented then came back with an amendment and it was passed out of commerce 12 to zero. Representative Andrade. Thank you, mister chairman. Representative Lehman, did you just say that they have a contract with the city? I'm not sure what their arrangement is to be honest.
I can find out for sure, but it's like a quasi they're not a they're not a governmental entity. And but they're a quasi governmental entity in the way they're they're structured. So I think when this bill is addressing those who are dealing with, the state of Indiana, which they're not. They're doing more with the city of Indianapolis. Sure. That's why they're Sure. So, buddy, we have that situation here in Indianapolis. I'm concerned that we might have the similar structure and other place I think that was one of the concerns when this was first brought up the first week we did this in commerce, and I don't believe there was anyone else who fit into that category.
So there's no other third parties that already have a contract who worked there? I don't believe so. Okay. I can confirm that. Thank you. Thank you. Any further questions? I have an amended bill. What's the will of the committee? We do pass as amended. Second. Motion and second. Call the roll, please. Thompson. Yes. Snow. Yes. Schroeder. Yes. Square. Yes. Keith. Yes. O'Brien. Yes. Slater. Yes. Crystal. Yes. J. Aye. Yes. Prescott. Excused. Yes. Aye. Aye. Small. Excused. Green. Excused. Porter? Aye. I'm driving. Aye. Campbell. Excused. Delaney. Aye.
Harris. Aye. Aye. Excused. Thank you. The bill passes out 19 to zero. Got a yes. Thank you, everything layman. I was conservative. I was conservative. For sure, I did make a somewhat derogatory remark about representative Klinger being Hamilton's babysitter. That's I was not exaggerating him as babysitter, and so I was concerned about her yes, though, today. I mean, what's that mean? You got a yes. What's wrong with the truth? Right? You got a yes in. Thank you. With that, we'll go to the the next bill representing Lindauer, house bill four sixty five.
Is that right? I believe. Welcome. And this bill actually is a hearing amend and vote. And as you know, we have an amendment. Go ahead and present the bill, please, sir. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'll be very brief. I know there's somebody else signed up to testify that can talk a little more specifically about the tech park in question. But, senate bill four sixty five is very similar to, house bill sixteen fifteen that passed through this committee, earlier in session. The goal, is to help strengthen the Indiana's national, defense industry. Basically, what it does for those of you who follow the the the tech park world, there's level one and level two currently.
This would create a level three tech park. So level one can capture up to $5,000,000 in incremental tax financing. Level two can go an additional 250. What we would like to do, is in in it well, currently in this bill, it sits at an additional $10.10, 10, $10,000. So would appreciate, would appreciate any help you can offer, on that, and when it passed in 1615, it went up an additional $250,000 above the above the level two. So, with that, I'm I'm happy to take any questions, but I'll defer to the other gentleman who's here to testify as well.
But I'd appreciate your support. Thank you. Any questions? Representative Slager? Yes. Thank you, representative. I'm just I'm just not clear. Is this an additional 10,000 over the $2.50? Yes. Representative Slager. Yeah. Thank you for the question. I didn't do a good very good job there. What why? So just just to allow them more investment in their facility. So I what this in full disclosure, this this bill would apply to only Westgate currently. It doesn't necessarily preclude, anyone else because they do have to be to be a level three, you also have to be in a,
designated military enhancement area of which Westgate sits outside of Crane. And and so they are just looking to to maximize, the investment that can happen there. Well, it just it really seems like a rather diminu diminimous amount of money. I mean, why not 300 or, you know I'm all for that. I mean, what I I'm just trying to understand. It seems like small change. Yeah. So to be To that question, Representative Slager, when 1615 when it passed, it was an additional 250,000
that on top of the level two. So it would have been 500,000 in total over the 5,000,000 of a level one if if I'm making sense here. So I would welcome that change, but this is where it sits at the moment. So Reverend Slager, I believe what occurs is on the other side, to have bills not recommitted to appropriations. They keep it to a threshold that moves the bill on. That that's the why in terms of of what what occurred. And I have an amendment to take it right to exactly what we passed out of the house in 1615. I got the numbers right?
Yes, mister chairman. Is it okay with the committee? Just go ahead and we have can we adopt the amendment to put the bill exactly as it was in 1615, be the same same language? Which amendment? I'm I'm sorry. It's amendment number two. I stand I'm sorry. Amendment number two puts it in the same exact spot as as 1615 as it left the house. Consent. Consent. Consent. Consent. Consent. Consent. We have an amended bill. Any further questions from the committee? Mhmm. Clinker? Thank you, mister chairman. Would this include, would this amendment and change,
would this include a place like Purdue Research Technology Park? I'm I'm sorry. Say again Would that include a research park like Purdue University is getting SK INEX, chip manufacturer? Would that include with the additional? I'm not familiar with it. I don't believe it would. You have to be the language says you have to be, again, outside a a qualified military enhancement area. So, I'm I'm not familiar with that tech park, but I don't believe it would. My understanding right now is is Westgate is the only one in the state currently. Okay. Thank you. Yes. Yes, sir. If the clinic, that's my understanding too.
It only would apply to Westgate. It'd be just just that that one one location. Further good questions? I know we have someone here to testify. I know I want you to, of course, thanks for being here. And, sir, I'm not sure I don't have my list, but I know somebody signed up. So welcome. And I floor is yours, sir. Yes. There we go. Can you all hear me? Alright. Okay. Perfect. Thank you. Well, good morning. My name is Bryant Niehoff, and, I am the CEO of a group called the Uplands Science and Technology Foundation or
USTF. So thank you, Chairman Thompson, for the opportunity, to speak to the members of the committee here. And thank you for your continued commitment to economic development in Indiana. So just a bit about USTF. Our organization leads is leading the transformation of the West Gated Crane Technology Park into an innovation hub that supports defense and advanced manufacturing industries across Davies, Green, and Martin Counties. Anchored by NSA Crane, one of the nation's largest naval installations, Westgate plays a vital role in Indiana's defense and innovation ecosystem.
Westgate was created to leverage Crane's presence and bring high-tech defense tech opportunities to Southern Indiana. It has delivered as of 2023, '15 point '9 million dollars in incremental state tax revenues and attracted over $115,000,000 in total investment. A an approximate, you know, 720% return on the investment. NSA Crane contributes over $4,000,000,000 annually to Indiana's economy. Just an immense economic impact on our state and certainly in supporting the warfighter at
the federal level, and for the nation. Westgate at Crane strengthens that impact by attracting defense sector investment, by, attracting defense contractors to support that ongoing mission of NSA Crane, and those that might otherwise locate elsewhere, especially in, competing areas like Huntsville, Alabama, and elsewhere, right, around the nation. Currently, the Park The park supports over 950 high-tech jobs supporting the Indiana economy. And the average salary is about $87,000. So, great jobs in Southwest Indiana.
The upcoming microelectronics fab is projected to add another 400 new jobs, each averaging over $100,000 average annual salary. So great, great employment in the region. Within the next ten years, we anticipate the potential of 3,600,000,000.0 in payroll growth and over 3,700 new jobs within Westgate at Krann in the defense sector in Southwest Indiana. To achieve that, we we really need to keep up with the critical infrastructure to support that growth, and to meet growing demand,
especially for power, water, wastewater, and those critical services needed to support that investment. Legislation like, SEA February in 2023, which increased the annual CTP collections from 100,000 to 250,000 has been critical. Still, West Skated Crane faces high development costs unique to the defense industry. And just to give an example of that, we have a small wastewater treatment plant, package plant. Right? 50,000 gallons per day. We are working on expanding that up to 350,000
gallons per day just to support the ongoing growth. Just one example of the ongoing infrastructure needs in the park. And senate bill four sixty five would significantly help us tackle these barriers for Westgate, Ukraine and continue to support the defense tech economy here in Indiana. And that would enable, you know, defense related parks like Westgate to meet this ongoing demand and strengthen, the state's national security footprint. So we respectfully urge your support for expanding CTP tax collection limits for defense focused
technology parks as proposed in this bill. And with your help, Indiana can continue to lead in innovation, economic growth and national defense. Thank you and I would be happy to answer any questions. Thank you. Any questions for the gentleman? Jordan? Thank you very much for being here today. I don't know if this is public information or not, but who would be the largest private employer that would be in the current, park? That's a great question. I would say it's one of two, and that would either be ManTech or Amentum,
which are both, you know, national defense tech firms. We also have folks like, Huntington Ingalls, HII, which is the largest ship builder in in the nation. Right? That has a footprint right there at West Gate Of Crane. And just in the past couple of weeks, we had Kratos National Security Defense announce their Indiana payload integration facility that'll be investing right here, in Indiana. So yeah. Thank you. Thank you. Any further questions? Thank you, sir. Yes. Thank you. We have adopted one amendment. There is another amendment filed.
Is are there any additional amendments? Hearing none, what's the will of the committee on the amended bill? Move to pass the amended. Motion and second. Call the roll, please. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Slater. Yes. Crystal. Yes. Aye. Yes. Excused. We're all ready. Yes. I need I. Long. Excused. Three. Excused. Four. Aye. Aye. Gamble. Excused. Bill passes out 20 to zero. Thank you very much. Well, committee members, it's been a fun, sometimes it'd be challenging three plus months,
but thank you for all your work. And I do wanna say, to be sure, I know we're gonna disagree on some topics, but in the interim, my door's open. You know that. And so we can talk about some things. We have some things on the table. We'll take some more work. I welcome discussion from both sides. And, sir, President Porter, thank you for all your help and cooperation. Even though we disagreed, I appreciate what you've done. And and, sir, if you wanna make any comments, of course, I would welcome that, but that that's your decision. But we adjourn. You got you have the floor. After yesterday, thank you, mister chairman. Sincerely, on behalf of of our caucus,
we wanna, thank you for, allowing us to do the the process at the committee level. As you said, your store has always been open. As I know, members have gone talk to him, and you have included, with representative Snow and your other team, language, you know, within our process. Look forward to, 10:01 as it's being deliberated across the hall right now and others. And we even look more forward to, this afternoon in Senate bill one. It's not personal.
It's business. I understand you. Thank you, Representative Porter. Again, committee members, thank you for all your hard work, and it's been been been a great serving with you. And I still hope to see you all next year. So with that, we stand adjourned.