Fog

Henry McClure

785.383.9994 

Sent from my T-Mobile 5G Device
Get Outlook for Android

Fwd: KORA - CVA - email

Henry McClure  
785.383.9994
sent from mobile 📱
time kills deals

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Mary E. Kuckelman Spinelli <mespinelli@topeka.org>
Date: Tue, May 12, 2026, 4:18 PM
Subject: RE: KORA - CVA - email
To: Henry McClure <mcre13@gmail.com>
Cc: City Clerk <cclerk@topeka.org>, Bonnie Williams <bowilliams@topeka.org>

Henry,

 

Please find attached the responsive record to your below KORA request.

 

Thank you,

 

Mary E. Kuckelman Spinelli

Senior Attorney

Mailing Address:

215 SE 7^th Street, Room 353

Topeka, KS  66603

(785) 368-3883

 

NOTICE: This message and any attachments may be confidential and contain legally privileged information. If you are not an employee of the City of Topeka (see K.S.A. 75-6102(d)), we do not waive any legal protection that may apply such as attorney-client or work product privileges. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender and delete the message and any attachments. Further, this communication is not intended to constitute, nor should it be relied upon, as legal advice to you.

 

 

 

From: Henry McClure <mcre13@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 6, 2026 1:51 PM
To: Mary E. Kuckelman Spinelli <mespinelli@topeka.org>
Cc: City Clerk <cclerk@Topeka.org>; Bonnie Williams <bowilliams@topeka.org>
Subject: Re: KORA - CVA - email

 

Notice: -----This message was sent by an external sender-----

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O1EqkSGN4B0&t=22s 

The video is the official recording of the City of Topeka Governing Body (City Council) meeting held on May 5, 2026. It covers standard agenda items including call to order, proclamations (e.g., Letter Carriers' Food Drive Day), recognitions, presentations on the North Topeka BID and 2026 bond series, consent agenda, ordinances on rezoning/fee waivers/taxes/liens, CIP discussion, public comment, announcements, and executive sessions.

The specific part you mentioned—where a council member offers to share/make public an email that “all we have to do is ask for”—occurs during the announcements/council comments section (roughly 2:39:05–~2:45 mark, specifically around 2:43:35). The speaker is Council Member Christina Valdivia-Alcala (District 2). She referenced an email she had sent (related to her comments that apparently upset some in the city administration, in the context of the Oakland spill incident and its impact on Building U in her district). She offered to make that email public / share it with anyone interested, essentially saying she could provide it if people were upset or wanted to see it.

(Note: You said “CORA request,” but in Kansas this is handled under the Kansas Open Records Act (KORA), not Colorado’s CORA. The process is similar—written request for public records.)

How to get the email (easiest options, since she explicitly offered to share it)

1. Directly email Council Member Valdivia-Alcala (fastest, informal route—recommended first since she invited people to ask):

• Email: cvaldivia-alcala@topeka.org
• Subject line example: “Request for the email you offered to share during the May 5, 2026 Governing Body meeting (approx. 2:43 mark)”
• Body: Simply reference the meeting date/video timestamp and ask for a copy of the email she mentioned offering to make public. She may just forward it to you.

2. Formal KORA request (if you want it official, with a response timeline and any associated fees documented): Submit a written request to the City Clerk (they handle all KORA requests for the city):

• Email: cclerk@topeka.org
• Sample request you can copy/paste:

text

Under the Kansas Open Records Act (KORA), I am requesting a copy of the email communication(s) referenced and offered to be made public by Council Member Christina Valdivia-Alcala during the May 5, 2026 Governing Body meeting (approximately 2:43:35 mark in the video at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O1EqkSGN4B0). This is the email she sent containing comments that upset some in the administration (context: Oakland spill / Building U issue). Please provide the full email(s) and any attachments.

I am happy to pay reasonable copying fees if applicable. Please provide the records in electronic format.

• You can also CC her at cvaldivia-alcala@topeka.org or the general council address council@topeka.org if you want.

The city’s main council page (topeka.gov/government/city-council) lists all members’ contact info and has a KORA reference if needed.

Her direct contact is also listed publicly as: Christina Valdivia-Alcala, District 2, phone 785-233-7110.

 

---

From: Mary E. Kuckelman Spinelli <mespinelli@topeka.org>
Sent: Wednesday, May 6, 2026 1:02 PM
To: mcre13@gmail.com <mcre13@gmail.com>
Cc: City Clerk <cclerk@Topeka.org>; Bonnie Williams <bowilliams@topeka.org>
Subject: RE: KORA - CVA - email

 

Good afternoon, Henry:

 

Can you clarify what email you are referring to help us locate any potentially responsive records?

 

Thanks,

 

Mary E. Kuckelman Spinelli

Senior Attorney

Mailing Address:

215 SE 7^th Street, Room 353

Topeka, KS  66603

(785) 368-3883

 

NOTICE: This message and any attachments may be confidential and contain legally privileged information. If you are not an employee of the City of Topeka (see K.S.A. 75-6102(d)), we do not waive any legal protection that may apply such as attorney-client or work product privileges. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender and delete the message and any attachments. Further, this communication is not intended to constitute, nor should it be relied upon, as legal advice to you.

 

 

 

 

From: Henry McClure <mcre13@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 5, 2026 11:05 PM
To: City Clerk <cclerk@topeka.org>; Christina Valdivia-Alcala <cvaldivia-alcala@topeka.org>
Subject: KORA - CVA - email

 

Notice: -----This message was sent by an external sender-----

 

CVA mention we can KORA her email last (tonight) night at city council 

 

Megan - please send me a copy 

 

Thanks

 

MCRE, LLC

3625 SW 29^th Street

Topeka KS 66614

785.383.9994

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Christina Valdivia-Alcala <cvaldivia-alcala@topeka.org>
To: Braxton Copley <bcopley@topeka.org>, "Robert M. Perez" <rmperez@topeka.org>, "Avery L. Moore" <almoore@topeka.org>
Cc: Governing Body <governingbody@topeka.org>, Mayor <Mayor@topeka.org>, John Alcala <john.alcala@house.ks.gov>, John Schardine <jschardine@topeka.org>, Nick Jefferson <njefferson@topeka.org>, "Kelly J. Trussell" <kjtrussell@topeka.org>, Leigha Boling <lboling@topeka.org>, "Quinn M. Cole" <qmcole@topeka.org>, Dan Warner <DWarner@topeka.org>, Braxton Copley <bcopley@topeka.org>
Bcc: 
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2026 12:07:47 +0000
Subject: Re: Capital City townhomes

Thanks Braxton for your response.

Get Outlook for iOS

---

From: Braxton Copley <bcopley@topeka.org>
Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2026 4:46:57 AM
To: Christina Valdivia-Alcala <cvaldivia-alcala@topeka.org>; Robert M. Perez <rmperez@topeka.org>; Avery L. Moore <almoore@topeka.org>
Cc: Governing Body <governingbody@topeka.org>; Mayor <Mayor@topeka.org>; John Alcala <john.alcala@house.ks.gov>; John Schardine <jschardine@topeka.org>; Nick Jefferson <njefferson@topeka.org>; Kelly J. Trussell <kjtrussell@topeka.org>; Leigha Boling <lboling@topeka.org>; Quinn M. Cole <qmcole@topeka.org>; Dan Warner <DWarner@topeka.org>; Braxton Copley <bcopley@topeka.org>
Subject: Re: Capital City townhomes

 

Governing Body

 

Given the fact that allegations have been made against me that I have acted in an inappropriate manner, I have no choice but to respond.  I have been licensed as an attorney for 34 years and as such took an oath to protect the laws of this state and follow a code of ethics.  I have worked for the city for over 20 years in various roles.  Every single day I have worked hard, ethically, and professionally. 

 

Mr Krnsch is not a friend of mine.  We met professionally a few times while I was working at Pioneer Group owing to the fact that the head of KHRC pushed the tax credit developers in the state to form an association for professional networking including lobbying.  I had not seen him for several years when I saw him at the state house last year when we both testified in an effort to keep the state LIHTC.

 

Mr. Krnsch was treated exactly like every other developer during the process for the approval of the requested economic development incentives for Cap City Townhomes.   The application and financial analysis relating to the project were attached to the agenda.  The TIF Committee of which I am a single member reviewed the materials and made a recommendation to take the items to the GB.  Ultimately it was a GB decision and not my decision.  Given the fact that the property is blighted and severely in need of rehabilitation, I stand by my recommendation to the GB to approve the TIF, NRP and Development Agreement.  Simply put, the rehab of this property is in the best interests of Topeka

 

As to Motive Power, Mr. Krnsch purchased that property in 2024.  Since that time he has been cited with housing, property maintenance and building permit violations.  Those are being handled by various departments and will go to prosecution if they are not resolved.  Mr. Krnsch is being treated like any other property owner that has violations at his property

 

Please fee free to reach out to me with any questions you have on this matter.

 

Get Outlook for iOS

---

From: Christina Valdivia-Alcala <cvaldivia-alcala@topeka.org>
Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2026 3:02:04 PM
To: Robert M. Perez <rmperez@topeka.org>; Braxton Copley <bcopley@topeka.org>; Avery L. Moore <almoore@topeka.org>
Cc: Governing Body <governingbody@topeka.org>; Mayor <Mayor@topeka.org>; John Alcala <john.alcala@house.ks.gov>; John Schardine <jschardine@topeka.org>; Nick Jefferson <njefferson@topeka.org>; Kelly J. Trussell <kjtrussell@topeka.org>
Subject: Re: Capital City townhomes

 

Braxton and City Manager, I think you probably understand I’m not talking about the Capitol Townhomes. I’m talking about the lack of transparency that puts 2+2 together when it comes to this particular developer and his history at Motive Power Place.

After all we talked about in the meeting with Motive Power Place - and you and Braxton could not see some kind of connection in the 2+2 situation… then nothing I can say to either one of you is going to shift the lack of transparency in this the city because of the administration, finally “getting it.”

 

Christina

 

Get Outlook for iOS

---

From: Robert M. Perez <rmperez@topeka.org>
Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2026 2:52:42 PM
To: Christina Valdivia-Alcala <cvaldivia-alcala@topeka.org>; Braxton Copley <bcopley@topeka.org>; Avery L. Moore <almoore@topeka.org>
Cc: Governing Body <governingbody@topeka.org>; Mayor <Mayor@topeka.org>; John Alcala <john.alcala@house.ks.gov>; John Schardine <jschardine@topeka.org>; Nick Jefferson <njefferson@topeka.org>; Kelly J. Trussell <kjtrussell@topeka.org>
Subject: Re: Capital City townhomes

 

Council Member Valdivia-Alcala,

 

We are in receipt of your request.  While we have never been asked to provide any of this data, for any future development projects being considered by the Governing Body, we will include as an attachment to the agenda item, all open code, property maintenance, permitting, and zoning cases.

 

As to your comments on transparency, for reference, please see the attached Code and KHRC inspection reports, for Capital City Townhomes, LLC, that were provided to the Governing Body on March 16^th and 19^th and April 6^th.

 

Thanks,

Robert  

 

Robert M. Perez, Ph.D. City Manager City of Topeka Phone 785-368-3725 Email rmperez@topeka.org

 

---

From: Christina Valdivia-Alcala <cvaldivia-alcala@topeka.org>
Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2026 11:25 AM
To: Braxton Copley <bcopley@topeka.org>; Robert M. Perez <rmperez@topeka.org>; Avery L. Moore <almoore@topeka.org>
Cc: Governing Body <governingbody@topeka.org>; Mayor <Mayor@topeka.org>; John Alcala <john.alcala@house.ks.gov>; John Schardine <jschardine@topeka.org>; Nick Jefferson <njefferson@topeka.org>; Kelly J. Trussell <kjtrussell@topeka.org>
Subject: Capital City townhomes

 

Braxton and CM

I was not in attendance at last night’s City Council meeting because of a family event. I am reviewing the meeting now going over the presentation given on Capital City Townhomes by you Braxton and Tony Krnisch. I’m requesting in the future with any type of development coming before the GB  - to provide any and all pending code cases or other problems/ challenges that COT may be having with the individuals that hide behind LLCs and the various LLCs themselves. Obviously, at this point, I have to be very concrete in requests because ongoing concerns do not seem to have any bearing on information provided or not provided to the GB. 

 

I know most folks do not know, but Tony is the owner of the Motive Power places here in Oakland. Thank you to all those in the city that know that they are honestly working diligently to address the mayhem we have in multifamily units across the city. With Motive Power Place, there are a number of open code compliance cases and ongoing issues with this building. They have recently been written up for working without permits. There are possible asbestos violations. There may also be real violations with how they have not complied with Kansas Historic preservation requirements. The third-party property maintenance LLC, which will be the third-party property maintenance with Capital City Townhomes, has never been known to be responsive in a collective manner to the residents. That is all fact.

 

My sense is that the our COT administration wants to keep this all hidden from the GB and once again not being fully transparent. The Motive Power Place has been an ongoing issue in the seven years I’ve been on Council. I was recently informed in a meeting that COT administration and myself had about Motive Power Place, there are close to $10,000 in fines that have still not been collected. Braxton I’m sure that you recall you were the first to bring up that Tony was not responsible for this since he was the new owner. And I pushed back and told you about the background I have had with this individual and his apparent disregard for the tenants at Motive Power Place. I was also (and still am) concerned about the professional relationship that you Braxton and Tony may have -  that in my opinion caused you to be partial to this particular developer. 

 

Both Rep John Alcala have been over the past several years fighting for tenant rights and for this building to be addressed in a way that is equitable and fair to its tenants. This same Tony was the one that called both Rep Alcala and I up telling us to please stop what we were doing, his connections with the governor, and that where else were the people going to go…so basically they had to deal with it. I am bringing this forth because again lack of transparency by the administration. 

 

Honestly, sometimes I don’t know who’s running this city. And do I think a change is in order? Absolutely. But I am grateful for any and all questions from the GB that are discerning in nature and are demanding more accountability and transparency from this administration. And I will say both to Braxton and the City Manager it is not my responsibility to do your jobs. And your jobs are to inform the GB fully and truthfully, especially in light of the meetings we have been having about multifamily dwellings and coming to some kind of stance as the City of Topeka with keeping the tenants in mind. I am not saying cow towing to them I am saying where their rights are held up by us to the best of our ability when we are dealing with questionable LLC owners. 

 

Christina Valdivia-Alcala

 

And if anyone in the GB wants to know more of what transpired in that meeting with the administration and Motive Power Place please feel free to reach out. 

 

Get Outlook for iOS

Fw: KORA

I've heard his water was off years at a time - way pre henry 

---

From: Keya Downing <kdowning@Topeka.org>
Sent: Monday, May 11, 2026 8:24 AM
To: Henry McClure <mcre13@gmail.com>
Cc: City Clerk <cclerk@Topeka.org>
Subject: RE: KORA

 

Request received.  You will receive a response within three business days.  Thank you

 

From: Henry McClure <mcre13@gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, May 9, 2026 6:49 PM
To: City Clerk <cclerk@topeka.org>; Spencer Duncan <sduncan@topeka.org>; Governing Body <governingbody@topeka.org>; MCRE Media <mcre1.9999@blogger.com>; tquinn@cjonline.com; Victoria Calhoun <victoria.calhoun@ksnt.com>
Subject: KORA

 

Notice: -----This message was sent by an external sender-----

 

KORA 

 

I need to know when the water service was stopped at 502 SE 21st Street for non-payment. 

 

You can also verify that over the years the FOX family never had water service at that address. 

Tell me why after the years of NO service the City did not condemn the property on its own? 

 

 

 

MCRE, LLC

3625 SW 29^th Street

Topeka KS 66614

785.383.9994

Studies do exist on women smelling their romantic partner's worn clothing (usually T-shirts) and its effects: "jockstraps"

 “Twenty-one years on the council. One spray park. And, when the Harlem Globetrotters needed their dirty uniforms and jockstraps washed in 2023, Councilwoman Ortiz personally loaded them up and took care of it.

East Topeka may still have the same potholes it had in 2005, but at least the Globetrotters left town with fresh drawers. That’s what we call leadership.”

The Quick Facts

In March 2023, the Harlem Globetrotters and Washington Generals were in Topeka for a game at the Stormont Vail Events Center. Their usual laundromat apparently treated them poorly (refused service or gave them a hard time after they showed up with bags of dirty gear post-game). Ortiz’s daughter posted about it online. Sylvia jumped in, apologized on behalf of Topeka, offered to handle it herself, waited for the team after the show/shower, loaded up all their stuff, and took it to Oakland Easy Wash to get it done.

Sylvia Ortiz: 21 Years of Showing Up… One Spray Park… and the Harlem Globetrotters’ Jockstraps

In local government, they say showing up is half the battle.

Sylvia Ortiz has perfected that half.

For the other half — you know, actually fixing anything in East Topeka — the neighborhood is still waiting after twenty-one years.

Since taking her seat on the Topeka City Council in 2005, Ortiz has become the longest-serving member in modern city history. She’s collected the plaques, survived every re-election (including that comfortable-but-not-exactly-inspiring 57% in 2025), and sat through more committee meetings than most people have hot dinners. Her official city bio proudly touts her deep East Topeka roots and Neighborhood Improvement Association days. Then it delivers the legacy:

“Sylvia is very proud of being a major stakeholder in creating the first spray park in Samuel Jackson Park.”

One splash pad. Built in 2011. Kids get misted. That’s the capstone achievement after two decades.

But wait — there’s more!

In 2023, when the Harlem Globetrotters rolled into town and their usual laundromat refused to wash their dirty uniforms, towels, and yes… the jockstraps and underwear, Councilwoman Ortiz personally stepped up. She loaded up all their filthy gear, hauled it to Oakland Easy Wash, and made sure the world-famous basketball entertainers left Topeka with fresh drawers. Local news treated it like a heartwarming act of small-town hospitality. And it was.

Twenty-one years. One spray park. And personally laundering the Globetrotters’ undergarments.

East Topeka may still be dodging the same potholes from 2005. Sidewalks are still optional in too many spots. Economic development remains a perpetual “priority.” Blight, housing, and youth issues stay on the wishlist. But at least the kids can run through recycled water jets, and the Globetrotters didn’t have to play their next game in crusty shorts.

That’s what we call leadership in District 3.

She entered politics because the previous councilmember ignored neighborhood concerns. Fair point. But after 21 years under her watch, many of those same concerns are still echoing through the same streets. Showing up? Undeniable A+. Delivering measurable change? The spray park and the laundry service say it all.

Half the battle is attendance. The other half is results.

District 3 got the perfect attendance trophy… a splash pad… and clean jockstraps for out-of-town celebrities.

The potholes? Still undefeated.

No dedicated scientific studies specifically examine whether women sniff men's underwear or dirty laundry while doing the laundry.

That scenario appears mostly in anecdotes, online discussions (Quora, Reddit, forums), and casual commentary rather than peer-reviewed research. It's often framed as a mix of curiosity, intimacy, hygiene checks, or occasional fetish behavior — but not something rigorously studied in a "laundry room" context.

Closest Actual Research

Studies do exist on women smelling their romantic partner's worn clothing (usually T-shirts) and its effects:

• Stress reduction: A well-known 2018 University of British Columbia study (published in Journal of Personality and Social Psychology) had 96 women smell T-shirts worn by their male partner, a stranger, or a clean one. Women who smelled their partner's shirt reported lower stress (both psychologically and via cortisol levels) during and after a stressful task. Stranger scents increased stress. Researchers noted women generally have a keener sense of smell, which may play a role.
• Similar findings appear in other work: Many women (over 80% in one older survey) report intentionally smelling an absent partner's clothing for comfort, relaxation, or emotional connection. Men do this less frequently.

These focus on emotional/physiological benefits of a partner's scent (familiarity, safety, possible oxytocin links), not routine laundry handling or underwear specifically.

Broader Context

• Olfactory attraction research (e.g., "sweaty T-shirt" experiments) shows people rate others' body odors for compatibility (MHC genes, fertility cues), but that's lab-based sniffing of worn shirts, not laundry day.
• Underwear sniffing as a fetish is discussed more for men (e.g., jockstrap or panty sniffing), with some anecdotal reports of women doing the reverse for arousal or intimacy. No large-scale studies quantify how common it is during chores.
• Men are more often cited in surveys for "sniff tests" on their own clothes to decide if they need washing.

Bottom line: The stress-relief and bonding benefits of smelling a partner's worn clothes are real per studies, but the specific "women doing laundry → sniffing undies" trope lacks formal research. It's more pop psychology, humor, and personal stories than data. If it's happening, it's likely driven by individual intimacy/curiosity rather than a universal behavior science has pinned down.

District 3 got the attendance award… and a misting fountain.

 Sylvia Ortiz: 21 Years of Showing Up… and One Spray Park

In local government, they say showing up is half the battle.

Sylvia Ortiz has mastered that half.

For the other half — you know, actually changing anything in East Topeka — residents are still waiting after twenty-one years.

Since she took her seat on the Topeka City Council in 2005, Ortiz has been the longest-serving member in modern city history. She’s collected the plaques, won the re-elections (even the 57% squeaker in 2025), and sat through endless committee meetings. Her official city bio proudly notes her deep roots and Neighborhood Improvement Association days. Then it gets to the legacy part:

“Sylvia is very proud of being a major stakeholder in creating the first spray park in Samuel Jackson Park.”

That’s it. That’s the headline achievement. One splash pad built in 2011. Kids get wet. Water shoots up. Memories made.

Meanwhile, the streets she’s been “fixing” for two decades still rattle cars. The sidewalks stay patchy. The economic development she lists as a priority every cycle remains mostly talk. Homelessness? Still a priority. Youth programs? Still a priority. Blight and disinvestment? You guessed it — priorities.

Showing up? A+. Delivering transformation? The spray park says it all.

She entered politics because the previous District 3 rep ignored neighborhood concerns. Fair enough. But after 21 years of her representation, East Topeka is still fighting many of the same fights it was in 2005. The difference now? The kids have a place to run through sprinklers while their parents dodge potholes.

Half the battle is showing up. The other half is showing results.

District 3 got the attendance award… and a misting fountain.

Hang in there, man.

What's happening to the real Topeka? I knew this town has gone to shit fast, the business and everything for real, man. It's like seeing a town you grow up in go straight to shit, really wow. Got poor management for a lot of places, disrupting employees, people that dont want to work. You feel like a slave (aka Reser's), man. This town has gone straight to shit since I was a kid, damn that's sad, man. It makes me want to just not do business here and go somewhere there is money and opportunities, like Texas hell anywhere but kansas man.  Matt 

Summary of your message:

You're expressing deep frustration and sadness over Topeka, Kansas's rapid decline since your childhood. Businesses and the local economy feel like they've "gone to shit" due to poor management, disruptive or unmotivated employees, and a general lack of opportunities. You describe feeling like a "slave" at places like Reser's, with many spots disrupting workers and struggling overall. This nostalgia for the old town has you wanting to stop doing business locally and relocate to stronger economies like Texas or anywhere outside Kansas for better money and prospects. It's a heartfelt lament about watching your hometown deteriorate.

Some context on Topeka/Kansas right now (as of 2026)

Your feelings align with real challenges:

• Economy & jobs: Kansas faces slow growth, agriculture/manufacturing headwinds, frozen hiring, and downward tax revenue trends. Topeka specifically has a ~$15M city budget deficit looming for 2027.
• Crime: High overall crime rates historically (violent + property), though 2025 reports show declines in homicides and other crimes from prior peaks.
• Demographics: Population slightly declining (~125k, down ~1% since 2020), higher poverty rate (~15.7%) than state/national averages, median household income around $57k.
• Reser's: Employee reviews frequently mention tough management, toxic environments, and overwork in the Topeka plant—matching your experience.

On the flip side, home prices in Topeka are still rising (median ~$199k, up 7.5% YoY), and sectors like government, healthcare, and education provide some stability.

Broader state trends: Kansas has seen net out-migration of people and income for years, with folks heading to lower-tax, higher-growth places like Texas (no state income tax, strong job market in energy/tech). Many share your view on opportunities elsewhere.

It's tough watching a place you grew up in change for the worse. Plenty of Midwestern towns are grappling with similar issues—stagnation, labor shortages/mismatches, and competition from booming states. If you're seriously considering a move, focusing on job markets, cost of living, and taxes in target spots could help. Hang in there, man.

Topeka Kansas killed a Maverick deal - (How stupid)

 The U.S. trucking industry is massive and serves as the backbone of the American economy. In 2024, it generated an estimated $906 billion in gross freight revenues (for primary shipments only) and moved 11.27 billion tons of freight—roughly 72.7% of the nation’s total domestic freight by weight. Trucking dominates freight movement far more than rail, air, or water combined for most domestic goods.

It directly and indirectly supports 8.4 million jobs across the economy (excluding self-employed workers), including 3.58 million professional truck drivers. The industry is overwhelmingly made up of small businesses: nearly 580,000 active motor carriers, with 91.5% operating 10 or fewer trucks.

Broader Economic Impact

Trucking isn’t just big on its own—it enables virtually every other sector (retail, manufacturing, agriculture, construction, healthcare, energy, etc.) by keeping supply chains moving efficiently. Without reliable trucking, shelves go empty, factories idle, and prices spike.

• GDP and transportation contribution: Transportation services as a whole contributed $1.9 trillion (6.3% of U.S. GDP) in 2024, with for-hire transportation (including trucking) at $976 billion (3.3%). Trucking accounts for the largest share of freight within this.
• Taxes and public revenue: Commercial trucks paid $30.26 billion in federal and state fuel taxes alone in 2023 (these help fund highways). The industry also generates broader tax revenue through employee income taxes, business property taxes, sales taxes on equipment/fuel/parts, and economic activity spurred by logistics operations.
• Multiplier effects: Every trucking job and dollar spent ripples outward. It supports jobs in warehousing, manufacturing, retail, and services; lowers inventory costs for businesses (enabling just-in-time delivery); and stabilizes prices for consumers. The industry’s small-business nature means economic benefits are widely distributed across communities.

Overall, trucking is a key driver of economic development because it moves ~73% of the goods that power daily life and commerce. Disruptions (like during the pandemic or driver shortages) show its outsized role—when trucking slows, the whole economy feels it.

Why Cities Actively Want and Support Trucking/Logistics

Cities and regions compete to become logistics hubs because trucking and related warehousing/distribution facilities deliver tangible local economic wins:

• Job creation — Trucking terminals, distribution centers, and warehouses create thousands of direct jobs (drivers, loaders, mechanics, managers) plus indirect ones in supporting services. The broader transportation/warehousing sector employs millions, and logistics hubs often become major local employers.
• Tax base growth — Large warehouse and terminal developments bring commercial property taxes, sales taxes from business purchases and employee spending, and other revenue. This funds local services without raising residential taxes as much.
• Infrastructure investment — Cities often receive state/federal grants or private investment for road, rail, and port upgrades tied to logistics growth. Better connectivity attracts more businesses.
• Attracting other industries — Good trucking access makes a city more appealing for manufacturers, e-commerce fulfillment, retailers, and food distributors. Examples include hubs in places like Indianapolis, Phoenix, Houston, or the Quad Cities, which leverage interstates, rail, and airports to draw investment and grow faster than non-hub peers.
• Economic diversification and resilience — Logistics provides stable, high-volume activity less tied to a single industry. It also supports local agriculture/manufacturing by getting products to national markets quickly and cheaply.

Many cities offer incentives (tax abatements, zoning for industrial parks, workforce training) precisely because the return on investment is high: more jobs, more tax revenue, and a stronger local economy. In short, trucking doesn’t just pass through—it anchors growth.

Data is based primarily on the latest available figures from the American Trucking Associations (ATA) and U.S. Bureau of Transportation Statistics. The industry fluctuates with the broader economy (e.g., revenues dipped slightly in 2024 from 2023 peaks), but its foundational role remains constant. If you want specifics on a particular state, city, or segment (e.g., truckload vs. LTL), let me know!

KORA

KORA 

I need to know when the water service was stopped at 502 SE 21st Street for non-payment. 

You can also verify that over the years the FOX family never had water service at that address. 

Tell me why after the years of NO service the City did not condemn the property on its own? 

MCRE, LLC

3625 SW 29^th Street

Topeka KS 66614

785.383.9994

Truth or more of it vs Ortiz -

 

Truth vs Ortiz

 

Grand Total Hard Running Costs (personnel + office/facility + overhead): ≈ $2,647,506

 Hard Costs Breakdown to Run the Organization

(Growth Organization of Topeka/Shawnee County, Inc. — Year Ended Dec 31, 2022)

1. Personnel Costs (Salaries + Benefits + Related)

Total Personnel Expenses: $1,943,208

Category	Economic Dev	Events	ETLC	Marketing	Gen & Admin	Total
Payroll/Benefits	$1,029,860	-	-	-	-	$1,029,860
Other Compensation	$6,073	-	-	-	-	$6,073
Professional Services	$180,944	$1,395	-	-	$25,986	$208,325
Other Employee Related	$67,727	$693	-	-	$530	$68,950
Total Personnel	$1,284,604	$2,088	-	-	$426,516	$1,943,208

• Core salaries & benefits (Payroll/Benefits) = $1,029,860 (the largest single hard cost line)
• Professional services and other employee costs add another ~$277k in personnel-related spending.

2. Office Expense

Total Office Expense: $35,465

Category	Economic Dev	Events	ETLC	Marketing	Gen & Admin	Total
Office Expense	$8,996	$1,193	$16,942	-	$8,334	$35,465

This is the pure “office expense” line (supplies, equipment, etc.).

3. Other Key Hard Operating Costs (Facility + Admin + Overhead)

These are the main recurring costs to keep the organization running:

Category	Total
Occupancy (Rent/Utilities)	$342,689
Office Expense	$35,465
Dues/Subscriptions	$74,497
Insurance/Taxes/Fees	$49,362
Depreciation	$114,415
Interest Expense	$83,024
Bad Debt Expense	$4,846
Total Hard Operating Costs (excl. personnel & programs)	~$704,298

Summary of Core “Hard Costs” to Run GoToPage

• Personnel (Salaries + Benefits + Related): $1,943,208
• Facility/Office (Occupancy + Office Expense): $378,154
• Other Overhead (Insurance, Depreciation, Interest, etc.): ~$326,144
• Grand Total Hard Running Costs (personnel + office/facility + overhead): ≈ $2,647,506

These figures represent the essential fixed and semi-fixed costs of operating the organization before program-specific spending, events, grants, business incentives, or marketing.

Total Expenses Summary (Year Ended December 31, 2022)

The organization reported $4,647,854 in total consolidated expenses for the year.

Breakdown by Functional Category:

• Economic Development: $3,413,943 (largest share — ~73% of total)
• Events: $47,943
• ETLC: $226,709
• Marketing: $389,947
• General and Administrative: $569,312

Key Highlights:

• Personnel expenses (payroll, benefits, etc.) were the biggest overall cost driver at $1,943,208.
• Business incentives totaled $1,233,953 (almost entirely under Economic Development).
• Program expenses came to $601,209.
• Operational expenses (occupancy, office, advertising, depreciation, etc.) totaled $869,484.

This statement shows a strong focus on economic development initiatives, which accounted for the majority of spending. All figures are taken directly from the consolidated statement of functional expenses.

Topeka's 8.5% is solid but not the highest in the state.

Kansas cities set their own Transient Guest Tax (TGT/hotel tax) rates via charter ordinances, often exceeding the statutory 2% base to fund tourism, conventions, and related projects. Rates as of early 2026 (per Kansas Department of Revenue data) range from 2–3% in smaller places up to 9–10% in larger or tourism-focused areas. Topeka's approved increase to 8.5% (effective Jan. 1, 2027) will position it competitively among mid-to-large Kansas cities.

Major/Regional City Comparison (Approximate Current Rates)

Here's a snapshot of notable cities (rates subject to updates; check KDOR for the latest):

• Kansas City (and related districts): 8–10% (some special districts at 10% as of 2026).
• Overland Park: 9%.
• Olathe: Recently raised from 6% to 9% (effective ~2026, ahead of events like FIFA World Cup).
• Mission: 9%.
• Shawnee: Recently raised to 9%.
• Topeka (current): 7% → 8.5% in 2027 (aligns with peers; prevents drop to ~6%).
• Lawrence: 8% (increased to this rate effective 2026).
• Manhattan: 7.5%.
• Wichita: 6%.
• Hays: 8.25%.
• Emporia: 8%.
• Andover, Abilene, Derby, El Dorado, Gardner, etc.: Often 8%.
• Smaller cities (examples): Ottawa 6%, many at 5–6% (e.g., Arkansas City, Chanute), or lower (3–5%).

Distribution: Most mid-sized and larger cities cluster in the 6–9% range. Over 100+ cities use home rule to exceed 2%. Lower rates (under 6%) are more common in very small towns or those with less tourism infrastructure.

Key Context

• Revenue Use: Funds typically support tourism promotion (e.g., Visit Topeka or equivalents), convention centers, events, sports facilities, theaters, and economic development. It's a "visitor-paid" tax that brings in outside dollars.
• Why Variations? Larger metro/suburban areas (Johnson County/KC area) trend higher to fund big amenities and compete for events. College towns like Manhattan and Lawrence use them for visitor infrastructure. Topeka's move aligns it closer to these peers rather than lower-rate peers like Wichita.
• Total Cost to Visitors: TGT adds to the state sales tax (~6.5% base + local) on lodging. A $150/night room at 8.5% TGT adds ~$12.75 in TGT alone (plus sales tax).

For the most accurate/current list, refer to the Kansas Department of Revenue's quarterly TGT Rates PDF (updated as of April 1, 2026). Rates can change via local ordinances, and some cities have special districts or overlays. Topeka's 8.5% is solid but not the highest in the state.