ICV Testimony in Opposition to Senate Bill 277
On Jan. 12, 2026, Indiana Conservation Voters Conservation Campaign Manager Desi Rybolt delivered testimony in opposition to Senate Bill 277 in the Senate Committee on Environmental Affairs. Below is the full text of her testimony as prepared for delivery.
“Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, for the opportunity to speak on SB 277. I am Desi Rybolt, Conservation Campaign Manager with Indiana Conservation Voters. We rise in opposition to SB277.
“Though we have worked tirelessly through the short time we have had to digest this 176-page bill, it is nearly unattainable to fully relay the broader implications and effects of its contents in the time we have before us. Regardless, we have noticed some concerning themes.
“Through several different avenues, the bill severely narrows the agency’s duties to protect our environment, and by extension our “public health, safety, and welfare,” to cite a repealed section referencing water pollution (Sec. 174, page 84). In effect, the agency is exempted from responsibility to environmental stewardship and protection, and what remains is an agency that no longer works on behalf of the public. Hoosiers would have limited or no standing to hold their government accountable if it fails to protect them from bad actors and accidental, but preventable, health risks from polluters. This obstructs the power of the people.
“Compounding this issue, throughout the bill, there are at least 40 instances where mandatory provisions are downgraded to discretionary (“shall” to “may”, “must” to “may”). The obligation the agency has to protect Hoosiers’ environment and health is limited to the discretion of whoever may be in charge. Not only does this foster public distrust in our air, our water, and our soil, but this creates uncertainty for industry actors with each new Governor and his or her appointed leadership. Included in these discretionary provisions is assistance to local governments and the public to stay informed through education, transparency, and local programs like e-waste (Sec. 258, page 135) and clearinghouse/public education (Sec. 91, page 35).
“This is, of course, a general and incomplete compilation of our concerns with this bill. Overall, SB 277 doesn’t streamline permitting—it rewrites Indiana’s implementation of foundational federal environmental policies in ways that make pollution easier and accountability harder. We are always open to dialogue and cooperation to address challenges, but remain hesitant that each problem and inconsistency with SB 277 will be addressed in this compressed time frame.
“This is a bill best deliberated carefully and in the light of day, rather than rushed through; even the timeline we’ve had to discuss this today reflects the lack of transparency we find in the bill.”
Desi Rybolt
Conservation Campaign Manager
Indiana Conservation Voters
