785.383.9994
sent from mobile 📱
time kills deals
Topeka's population over the last 100 years (approx. 1925–2025) shows strong growth in the mid-20th century followed by stabilization and slight recent decline.
Here is the official U.S. Census data for city proper (not metro area):
| Year | Population | Change from Previous Decade | % Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1920 | 50,022 | — | — |
| 1930 | 64,120 | +14,098 | +28.2% |
| 1940 | 67,833 | +3,713 | +5.8% |
| 1950 | 78,791 | +10,958 | +16.2% |
| 1960 | 119,484 | +40,693 | +51.6% |
| 1970 | 125,011 | +5,527 | +4.6% |
| 1980 | 115,266 | -9,745 | -7.8% |
| 1990 | 119,883 | +4,617 | +4.0% |
| 2000 | 122,377 | +2,494 | +2.1% |
| 2010 | 127,473 | +5,096 | +4.2% |
| 2020 | 126,587 | -886 | -0.7% |
| Year | Population (Estimate) | YoY Change | % Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020 | 126,587 (Census) | — | — |
| 2021 | ~126,162 | -425 | -0.34% |
| 2022 | ~125,426 | -736 | -0.58% |
| 2023 | ~125,354 | -72 | -0.06% |
| 2024 | 125,467 | +113 | +0.09% |
| 2025 | 125,795 | +328 | +0.26% |
Key trends and context:
This matches the recent data you shared earlier, which aligns closely with official Census estimates. Topeka remains Kansas's 5th-largest city.
This is a recording of the Topeka Development Corporation (TDC) Board of Directors meeting held on May 19, 2026, hosted on the City of Topeka's YouTube channel. The meeting starts with the Pledge of Allegiance, roll call (all 10 members present), and approval of the April 14, 2026 minutes.
The core discussion focuses on approving a second amendment to the purchase and sale agreement for Hotel Topeka. Key points include:
Roy Arnold shared concept plans and updates on the project:
Board members asked questions about timelines, marketing strategies, past client engagement, and balancing event types. There was general support and recognition of administrative delays with the county IRB process, but confidence it would proceed. The board was urged to approve the extension to keep the deal alive.
The meeting continues beyond the provided transcript segments into formal consideration of the amendment (Item 6). The video is a straightforward, professional public meeting recording with minimal production elements.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PMZ6wvzl7is
want to watch
By Henry McClure
Topeka voters keep hearing the emotional argument: “We can’t allow Maverik because of the kids walking to Landon Middle School on Fairlawn.”
Sounds scary. Sounds like we’re protecting children.
But is it true? Let’s cut through the rhetoric with actual facts from USD 501.
According to the USD 501 Transportation Handbook:
Landon Middle School’s own handbook even has specific instructions for walkers arriving at school.
The proposed Maverik site is only about 360 feet from Landon Middle School. That’s roughly one city block.
Any kid living near Fairlawn and 6th, or in the immediate neighborhood, is well under the 1-mile limit. The school district designed the attendance zone expecting many of these students to walk.
District-wide Safe Routes to School data shows:
So yes — some kids do walk to Landon, especially those who live close. The district plans for it. They open the doors early for walkers. They expect students to walk up to a quarter-mile to a bus stop if they qualify for the bus.
Council members used the “protect the children walking to school” line to justify killing a private business that would have cleaned up a blighted vacant lot, created 20–50 jobs, and started paying taxes on land that’s given the city zero for years.
But the school district itself already treats walking on Fairlawn as normal and acceptable for middle schoolers.
They can’t have it both ways:
If the intersection is truly that dangerous for children, then USD 501 and the City should fix the crossing, add lights, crossing guards, or change the attendance boundaries — not kill a legitimate business on a vacant lot.
The emotional argument sounded good in the council chamber. The facts show it was overstated.
The vacant lot is still empty. The kids are still walking (or being dropped off). And Topeka is still out the jobs and tax revenue.
This is exactly why so many people are fed up with how “economic development” really works in this town.
Good morning Mr. McClure,
Thank you for your message. This message serves as confirmation that your email has been received by the council members.
Tonya L. Bailey
Sr. Executive Assistant to the City Council
City of Topeka
215 SE 7th St. Rm 211
785-368-3710
“The preceding email message (including any attachments) contains information that may be confidential, protected by the attorney/client or other applicable privileges or that may constitute non-public information. This message is intended to be conveyed only to the designated recipient(s). If you are not listed as a recipient of this message, please notify the sender immediately by replying to this message and then delete it from your system. Use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this message by unintended recipients is not authorized and may be unlawful.”
From: Henry McClure <mcre13@gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, May 16, 2026 4:29 PM
To: Governing Body <governingbody@topeka.org>; Spencer Duncan <sduncan@topeka.org>; City Clerk <cclerk@topeka.org>; countyclerk@snco.us; Kevin Cook <kevin.cook@snco.us>; MCRE Media <mcre1.9999@blogger.com>; James L. Bolden Jr. <jbcarpet2@aol.com>; Charles Baylor <cbaylor1@hotmail.com>; tquinn@cjonline.com; Victoria Calhoun <victoria.calhoun@ksnt.com>; WIBW Melissa Bruner <melissa.brunner@wibw.com>; Molly Howey <molly.howey@topekapartnership.com>
Subject: Kansas City vs. Topeka
|
Notice: -----This message was sent by an external sender-----
|
Topeka vs. Kansas City: Two Approaches to Economic Development — One Welcomes Private Investment, the Other Often Blocks It
Topeka and Kansas City (the broader metro spanning Missouri and Kansas sides) are both in the same state ecosystem, yet they handle private-sector growth in strikingly different ways. This contrast is clearest in cases like the rejected Maverik project in Topeka versus Kansas City’s aggressive pursuit of large travel centers and logistics investments.
1. Scale, Ambition, and Results
KC leaders view these as catalytic: more traveler spending, tax base growth, and strengthened logistics (critical since trucking dominates U.S. freight).
2. How They Use (or Don’t Use) Incentives and Tools
3. Handling NIMBY Concerns and Process
4. Outcomes for Everyday Residents
The Core Difference: Kansas City treats economic development as a partnership with private markets — remove barriers, provide targeted help where needed, and say “yes” when a solid project shows up. Topeka’s bureaucracy and council politics often say “maybe… but no” to the very projects their $5M machine is supposed to celebrate.
This isn’t about one city being “better” overall. Topeka has advantages in affordability and stability. But on turning private investment into real growth — especially on underused commercial land along major highways — Kansas City’s proactive, pro-development mindset delivers results that Topeka’s approach currently does not.
Voters in Topeka should ask: Why are we paying millions to attract business while rejecting the ones that arrive ready to build? Kansas City shows a clearer path — one that welcomes shovel-ready projects like Maverik instead of sending them packing. Topeka can adopt that mindset without losing its character. It starts with leadership that prioritizes the broader economic good over the loudest neighborhood voices.
From: Henry McClure <mcre13@gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, May 16, 2026 4:17 PM
To: dbanks8487@yahoo.com <dbanks8487@yahoo.com>; sduncan@topeka.org <sduncan@topeka.org>; City Clerk <cclerk@topeka.org>; molly.howey@topekapartnership.com <molly.howey@topekapartnership.com>; tquinn@cjonline.com <tquinn@cjonline.com>; Victoria Calhoun <victoria.calhoun@ksnt.com>; Melissa Brunner <melissa.brunner@wibw.com>; MCRE Media <mcre1.9999@blogger.com>; James L. Bolden Jr. <jbcarpet2@aol.com>; Charles Baylor <cbaylor1@hotmail.com>
Subject: Real News - But it starts with calling out the hypocrisy.
Topeka’s Economic Development Hypocrisy: We Pay Millions to Attract Business — Then Slam the Door in Its Face
By Henry McClure
Topeka, we have a problem.
Every year, Shawnee County taxpayers hand over roughly $5 million from our half-cent sales tax to the Joint Economic Development Organization (JEDO) and Go Topeka. That money pays for incentives, marketing campaigns, workforce programs, and glossy pitches telling the world we’re “open for business.” Officials celebrate every deal that brings a handful of jobs or a few million in private investment, bragging about return on investment and economic multipliers.
Then a real, private-sector company walks in the door — no taxpayer handouts required — and we send it packing.
That’s exactly what happened last August with Maverik, the fast-growing, trucker-friendly convenience and fuel chain. Maverik wanted to redevelop the long-vacant former Ramada West/Holidome property at 605 SW Fairlawn — prime real estate right off I-70. Their plan: a modern ~6,000-square-foot store with fresh food, 10 car fueling islands, dedicated truck lanes, and a scale. It was exactly the kind of high-volume travel center that fits perfectly on a major interstate corridor.
The Topeka Planning Commission reviewed it thoroughly. They approved it — twice. First the full truck-friendly version, then a scaled-back proposal with just the convenience store and car pumps after neighbors raised concerns. Traffic studies were done. Mitigations were offered.
On August 12, 2025, the City Council voted 9-1 to reject the entire project. Only Councilman David Banks had the courage to vote yes. The rest cited traffic on Fairlawn and safety fears for students at nearby Landon Middle School. One more eyesore stays empty. One more private investment that required zero city dollars is gone.
Think about that for a second.
We spend $5 million a year of your sales tax money to chase economic development. We offer tax breaks and grants to companies that want public assistance. Yet when a business shows up with its own money, sees market demand on I-70, and is ready to turn a blighted, tax-producing-nothing vacant lot into jobs, property taxes, sales taxes, and fuel taxes, we kill it over neighborhood complaints that could have been addressed.
This isn’t just bad policy. It’s hypocrisy on a grand scale.
Maverik wasn’t asking for millions in incentives. They weren’t demanding special treatment. They simply wanted to operate where travelers and truckers already stop — the backbone of America’s economy. Trucking moves over 70% of domestic freight. A quality fuel-and-food stop like Maverik strengthens logistics, supports local jobs (20–50 positions per site with benefits), clears blight, and generates ongoing tax revenue from a site that has contributed exactly zero for years.
Instead, we get to keep looking at weeds and cracked pavement while Go Topeka keeps spending your money on the next PowerPoint presentation.
The average voter gets this. You work hard, pay your taxes, and watch your city struggle with vacant properties, stagnant growth, and budget pressures. Then you hear officials talk endlessly about “attracting investment” while the same officials — responding to organized neighborhood pressure and emotional testimony — block the investment that actually showed up.
This isn’t about being anti-neighbor or anti-safety. Traffic and school zones matter. But so does the bigger picture: a stronger tax base that funds better roads, schools, and services for everyone — including the families on Fairlawn. Rejecting shovel-ready private development on a blighted site doesn’t make the corridor safer or quieter. It just guarantees the problems of vacancy and lost opportunity continue.
Topeka deserves better. We deserve leaders who understand that economic development isn’t just about the deals we chase with taxpayer dollars. It’s also about not killing the ones that arrive on their own.
The next time Go Topeka or JEDO asks for another round of your half-cent sales tax money, remember the Maverik site. Remember the 9-1 vote. Remember that while they’re busy “creating” development with your cash, real development got shown the door.
Voters, it’s time to hold them accountable. Demand that economic development means saying yes to private investment that actually builds Topeka — not just funding another bureaucracy that talks a good game.
The vacant lot at Fairlawn and 6th is still waiting. So are the jobs, the taxes, and the progress that could have been there today.
It’s not too late to change course. But it starts with calling out the hypocrisy.
Time Kills Deals
785.383.9994
H
444