A new, powerful Citizen Portal experience is ready. Switch now

Developers ask Whiteland to allow amended tax‑benefit timetable as market shifted

June 10, 2026 | Whiteland Town, Johnson County, Indiana


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Developers ask Whiteland to allow amended tax‑benefit timetable as market shifted
Jeff Bennett of Dentons and Gary Horn, chief development officer at More Capital, told the council the More Logistics project was disrupted by shifting industrial market demand and a 2019‑era approval that has not matched current construction timing. "We chopped up lot three and we were building two 350s and then about a 179," Horn said, explaining the developer pivot to smaller buildings and why some pads were left idle.

Bennett said More Capital is under contract to sell lots 2, 3A, 3B, 3C and 4A–4B to local developer Ambrose and proposed filing an amended statement of benefits (CF1/SB1) to update start and completion dates. "We would first consult with Ambrose ... and then submit what would basically be an amended statement of benefits form," Bennett said, asking the council to consider receiving the amendment at a future meeting.

Town staff noted lot 3A currently shows about 53% of the originally estimated assessed value (AV) and flagged statutory questions about whether that constitutes "substantial completion." Staff did not make a formal recommendation on that legal determination and told council members they would be provided a summary spreadsheet and compliance notes for review.

Council members praised the overall project and said they were open to working with developers while urging caution about making a final decision when two council members were absent. "We've always had some flexibility in understanding the market," Councilmember Brad Gocker said, while Councilmember Tim Brown said he wanted all five members present before a final vote. Ambrose representatives present said the proposed July timetable was acceptable.

The council did not take an immediate vote on an amendment or extension; members asked the developers to consult with Ambrose, file the amended paperwork, and return for consideration at a meeting when the full council could participate.

Don't Miss a Word: See the Full Meeting!

Go beyond summaries. Unlock every video, transcript, and key insight with a Founder Membership.

Get instant access to full meeting videos
Search and clip any phrase from complete transcripts
Receive AI-powered summaries & custom alerts
Enjoy lifetime, unrestricted access to government data
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee