Mayor Joe Hogsett has vetoed Proposal 192, the City-County Council’s plan to raise vehicle taxes on Marion County drivers to pay for road and infrastructure work, saying the increase would add to financial burdens residents cannot absorb.
“When the City-County Council introduced its proposal to raise the vehicle excise surtax and wheel tax, I made clear that I do not support this measure, as it adds to the increased financial burdens facing Indianapolis residents today,” Hogsett said in a recorded message. “Throughout this conversation, one reality has been impossible to ignore: many households are already stretched to the limit. That is why I have decided to veto Proposal 192.”
The proposal would have raised the county vehicle excise surtax to a flat $100 for passenger cars, trucks, motorcycles and other vehicles under 11,000 pounds, and set the county wheel tax at $240 for buses, recreational vehicles, semitrailers, tractors, trailers and trucks. Most Marion County drivers now pay between $10 and $50 a year. The taxes were to take effect Jan. 1, 2027, and generate roughly $70 million a year in new revenue.
The council passed the measure 14-10 on July 6. All six Republicans voted against it, joined by Democrats Ron Gibson, Brienne Delaney, Frank Mascari and Crista Wells. Democrat Dan Boots was absent.
It is the first veto of Hogsett’s tenure. Before the vote, Council President Maggie Lewis noted the mayor had not vetoed anything the council had sent him since taking office in 2016.
Hogsett said the decision came out of conversations with residents, citing parents at back-to-school resource fairs over the weekend who told him they were unsure whether they could afford school supplies, and older adults on fixed incomes who told his office over the past month that the increase was “simply not doable.”
“When neighbors tell me rising costs are forcing hard decisions, it is my responsibility to listen,” he said.
The mayor also used the message to answer the central criticism of his position — that vetoing the tax puts $50 million a year in state money at risk.
“Let me be clear: this administration will meet the state’s match,” Hogsett said. He said the city’s infrastructure budget has more than tripled during his tenure, and that the administration’s commitment to meet the match “has been in development since we first advocated for this increased funding at the Statehouse, it has been shared with our City-County Council, and we will continue to communicate it transparently throughout the entire budget process.”
The council says it has not seen it. Denise Herd, a spokesperson for Lewis, told IndyPolitics the council has not received anything from the administration outlining how the city will meet the match.
The mayor’s message does not describe a plan. It says the administration’s commitment to meet the match has been shared with the council, and that details will be communicated through the budget process — which does not begin until the fall, after any override vote.
The mayor’s office did not respond to a request for comment before publication.
The match is the reason for the proposal. Under the road funding framework state lawmakers approved in 2025, Marion County can receive $50 million a year in state matching money beginning in 2027, but only if it raises qualifying local revenue to match it. Senate Enrolled Act 179, passed during the 2026 session, increases the required local match each year, reaching $100 million by 2031. Matching money not claimed in a given year is lost permanently.
The administration has said publicly it can meet the match without new taxes. Spokesperson Aliya Wishner has pointed to money already allocated in the 2026 and 2027 budgets, stormwater fees and the supplemental income tax distribution the state sends each spring — typically $20 million to $40 million — with budget efficiencies and growth covering later years. Councilor Andy Nielsen, the proposal’s author, has said that approach “is not really a plan.”
In a statement, Lewis said Proposal 192 will return to the full council for reconsideration. After reviewing the veto message, the council will vote on whether to override — which requires 17 of the council’s 25 members.
“The Council remains committed to fulfilling its legislative responsibilities through a transparent and deliberative process,” Lewis said.
She also pressed the administration to produce the plan.
“In exercising this veto, we look forward to receiving the mayor’s plan to fund the city’s infrastructure improvements, as required to obtain the state matching grant,” Lewis said.
The council has not set a date for the override vote. Lewis said timing will be announced through the council’s regular public meeting process.
This story has been updated and will be updated further.
