Parking Garage Update
Given the county’s current financial outlook, moving forward with a parking garage does not appear to be a fiscally responsible decision. Counties are already anticipating a loss of tax revenue due to Senate Bill 1, and it seems that rising assessed property values are being used to offset that loss. While I understand the importance of tax money coming into the county, I do not agree with shifting the burden on taxpayers in a way that feels like a shell game.
These concerns were echoed at the recent Coffee and Candidates meet-and-greet event at the Warsaw Library, where Councilman Dave Wolkins stated that although Kosciusko County is in a strong financial position, we have become too generous with our spending. He noted that it is not always fair to place blame solely on state or federal representatives when many of our financial pressures are within our own control. He also pointed out that while residents may be pleased to see property tax rates decrease on paper, those reductions are often offset by increases in assessed values.
His comments highlight exactly why I am concerned about taking on a major project like the parking garage. City residents would ultimately be paying for the garage twice, once through city taxes and again through county taxes. That burden being double for city residents raises questions such as does this parking garage best represent the wants and needs of city residents along with the County as a whole. Those questions should not be ignored.
With the county facing future revenue uncertainty and with assessed values already rising to compensate for losses, it is difficult to justify committing to a project of this scale even if we are promised 5 million in OIRI money. The county has other priorities that should take precedent, and we do not yet know what the next few years will look like for the county budget. For these reasons and reasons, I have already stated, I do not believe it is responsible to move forward with the parking garage currently.
All residents voices matter in our decisions, and we cannot forget that.
Statement on Data Centers and Community Protection
While I understand why data centers may appear financially attractive in the short term, there are far too many unanswered questions and too many promises that are either unproven or already broken. Short‑term revenue should never outweigh the long‑term impacts on our residents, our land, our water, and our overall quality of life.
Communities that rush to embrace data centers often focus only on immediate financial gain. I’m not willing to gamble with our future. I respect the counties that have chosen moratoriums or bans because they are putting people first — and that is what truly matters.
Residents will always be my top priority. I will keep an open mind and continue to learn, but I firmly believe data centers do not belong on agricultural land. People choose to live in the country for a reason, and that choice deserves respect. Industrial land is the only reasonable location for such facilities, and even then, they must be held to very strict standards before I would even consider that as a option. All county residents deserve if we were to ever even discuss a data center on industrial zoned land, I would want strong regulations such as:
- guaranteed well protections
- strong meaningful setbacks
- enforceable water‑use limits
- strong electric use limits
- noise controls
- property value protections
- county‑held bonds
- no tax abatements
These decisions should never be rushed. Unfortunately, some communities are moving far too quickly. The public deserves transparency, honesty, and a genuine voice in decisions that shape our future, especially decisions of this magnitude. The opinions of county residents must be part of the process.
Trust is one of the biggest issues with data‑center companies, and I am not willing to expose my neighbors to the potential downsides. I will not risk the well‑being of future generations. My life is rooted here, and I will always work to protect this county.
I was especially disappointed when while meeting with residents, a couple from the southern part of the county told me that when they attended a commissioners meeting last year that covered a proposed data center, Commissioner Conley asked them why they were there and said, “Do you have a dog in this fight?” That remark is deeply troubling. Decisions of this scale affect everyone, not just the immediate neighbors. Every resident deserves to be heard. I will never approach a citizen with a statement like that. If elected it will be my job to serve all residents county wide.
My life is rooted here, and I will always protect this community.
Kosciusko County has always been home.
From serving our community in law enforcement to continuing to stay involved with local events and organizations, I’ve always believed that strong communities come from people who care enough to show up and serve.
As I run for County Commissioner, my focus is simple: responsible leadership, transparency, and making sure our county continues to be a great place to live, work, and raise a family.
Saving the county taxpayers money will be an ongoing effort, but I am proud to say that I will not be accepting the "free" health insurance provided to elected county officials. While this choice may not save each taxpayer a large amount, it is still a step in the right direction.
I am fortunate to be able to provide my own insurance elsewhere, and I do not believe taxpayers should be responsible for taking on the burden of covering mine.
Every dollar I can save is the right thing to do when I am the one choosing to serve.
At this time, the proposed parking garage does not represent a responsible or well‑timed investment for our community. I can not support the current $15 million project. The financial burden placed on the taxpayers of the county is not justified by the projected return on investment.
Before committing to a project of this scale, especially one not located close enough from the downtown core that its economic impact is very uncertain. The focus should be to prioritize existing infrastructure needs. Several facilities and structural assets already require attention and repair. Addressing those issues first is a more prudent and fiscally sound approach for the county.
Transparency for taxpayers remains a central concern in this discussion. County residents will ultimately bear the majority of the financial responsibility for this project, it is important to clarify that the construction is not fully supported by outside funding. Additionally, one of the proposed sites, the former Munson parking lot was repaved only a few years ago, raising further questions about the long‑term planning behind this location choice.
Lackadaisical government often results when individuals become career politicians and lose touch with the people they are meant to represent.
I am not a lifetime politician, nor do I aspire to be one.
Too often, those who remain in the same positions for decades become disconnected from their constituents’ values and priorities, and at times place their own interests ahead of those of the public.
If elected, I will hold myself to a strict two-term limit. I would also encourage others to do the same, ensuring that leadership remains accountable and that fresh ideas and perspectives are continually brought forward—rather than allowing government to fall into complacent, repetitive routines.