Sugar Foods Corp. is interested in Mount Comfort Logistics Center Building V, located at 2709 N. County Road 400W. The building has 753,000 square feet. (ambrosepg.com)
Sugar Foods Corp. is interested in Mount Comfort Logistics Center Building V, located at 2709 N. County Road 400W. The building has 753,000 square feet. (ambrosepg.com)
The prospect of Sugar Foods Corp. coming to Hancock County is uncertain after the company pulled its tax abatement proposal just before Hancock County Council was set to vote on a confirming resolution during its Oct. 8 meeting.

Meanwhile, Sugar Foods leaders appeared before the Whiteland Town Council in Johnson County last week seeking an abatement similar to the one proposed to Hancock County officials.

Leaders of Sugar Foods first presented to Hancock County in September, with the company wanting to invest $35 million and add 105 jobs here. The company looked to enter a long-term lease agreement to establish a food manufacturing and distribution center at Mount Comfort Logistics Center Building V, located at 2709 N. County Road 400W.

As part of this potential expansion into Hancock County, Sugar Foods asked the council for a tax abatement for over $35 million worth of items that would be used to buy new equipment.

“We look to make a home. We look to become part of the community in which we are operating,” Sugar Foods executive vice president Sara Ribbler told county officials at that meeting.

The county council passed a declaratory resolution during its Sept. 10 meeting, and Hancock County Area Board of Zoning Appeals approved a special exception for food production at Mount Comfort Logistics Center Building V at its September meeting.

At the Oct. 8 meeting, county council member Jim Shelby said Sugar Foods had removed itself from the agenda because the building they were set to occupy was sold before they could sign the lease. Shelby also said the company found a new warehouse to lease, but did not elaborate on where the new warehouse would be.

“They probably found another space, but it takes time to negotiate another contract with them,” fellow council member Kent Fisk said at the meeting.

County records currently indicate the building Sugar Foods first sought out is still owned by Ambrose Mt. Comfort V LLC and that it has not been sold in 2025.

After Sugar Foods removed itself from the agenda in Hancock County, the Whiteland Town Council heard an abatement proposal from the company during its Oct. 14 meeting. In the presentation to Whiteland leaders, Sugar Foods requested a proposed seven-year abatement for $25 million of the proposed $40 million the company would invest in Whiteland.

Noted on the agenda as “Project Yellowjacket,” the presentation contained some of the same talking points as the pitch to Hancock County officials, including adding 105 new jobs and donating $10,000 to the local fire department and an average annual salary of around $63,000.

Michael Harrison, Sugar Foods’ chief operating officer, said they were looking at a building at the Gateway at Whiteland complex, which has a floor space of 617,000 square feet.

“We’re looking to do everything under one roof,” he told Whiteland officials.

The town council continued the matter to its November meeting, so that a full council could vote on the matter and the company could fill out a tax abatement application.

Hancock County Council President Mary Noe said she believes Sugar Foods still has some interest in Hancock County, and that Hancock Economic Development Council has not reached out to the council saying Sugar Foods has backed out of Hancock County.

She also said she did not know Sugar Foods had made a presentation to Whiteland.

“As far as I know, they are still seeking an abatement, but they are not on our calendar right now,” Noe said.

The Daily Reporter reached out to Sugar Foods to ask whether Whiteland and Hancock County were competing for the same project, but the company declined to comment at this time.

The Daily Reporter also reached out to HEDC for comment, but it declined to comment at this time and instead deferred to Sugar Foods and the owner of the building. The Daily Reporter reached out to representatives from building owner Ambrose requesting comment, but did not hear back by press time.

Elissa Maudlin of the (Franklin) Daily Journal, a sister newspaper of the Daily Reporter, contributed to this report.
© 2025 Daily Reporter