Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2026 6:05 AM
To: mcre13@gmail.com <mcre13@gmail.com>
Subject: Tax Incentives and Evil in our Government Schools
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tuesday, August 11, 2026
Fw: Tax Incentives and Evil in our Government Schools
Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2026 6:05 AM
To: mcre13@gmail.com <mcre13@gmail.com>
Subject: Tax Incentives and Evil in our Government Schools
Can we do it by November ?
Short answer: It is theoretically possible under home rule, but practically very difficult — and likely too late — to get a true advisory (non-binding) question onto the official November 3, 2026 general election ballot.
Key realities
Advisory elections have special status Kansas Attorney General opinions and the state’s Election Standards confirm that cities (constitutional home rule) and counties (statutory home rule) can call non-binding advisory elections on public issues. However, these are not official “question submitted” elections. Because of that, county election officials are generally not authorized to supervise or run them the same way they run candidate races or statutory ballot questions. Separate ballots and arrangements are typically required.
Timing is the biggest obstacle right now
- Today is August 11, 2026.
- Several Kansas county election calendars list September 1 as the deadline for questions to be placed on the general election ballot.
- UOCAVA (military/overseas) ballots must be transmitted by around September 19.
- Ballot design, proofing, printing, and voting-equipment programming take significant lead time.
Even if the full Topeka City Council or Shawnee County Commission voted tomorrow to request an advisory question, the election office would have very little time to accommodate it on the official November ballot — and may decline because advisory elections fall outside their normal authority.
What would actually be required
- Formal action by the full governing body (not one individual).
- Clear public-purpose language that does not improperly delegate legislative power.
- Cooperation from the Shawnee County Election Commissioner (who has discretion and may treat an advisory question differently from a statutory one).
- Sufficient time for ballot production — which is already compressed.
Practical alternatives if officials want public input soon
- Hold a special advisory election later (more expensive and requires its own process).
- Use existing public-hearing processes already built into the Conditional Use Permit reviews.
- Conduct surveys, town halls, or other non-ballot methods of gauging opinion.
- Aim for a later regular election if the goal is an official ballot question.
Bottom line: While home rule allows advisory questions in principle, getting one onto this November’s official ballot is highly unlikely given the non-official status of advisory elections and the tight production deadlines. The realistic window has largely closed. For a definitive answer on whether Shawnee County’s election office would even accept such a request at this late date, the governing body would need to contact the Election Commissioner directly and soon.
Why a single elected official cannot do it
No, it is highly unlikely that a single city council member, the mayor, or a county commissioner could get a data center question onto this November’s (November 3, 2026) ballot, and even the full governing body faces major practical and legal hurdles.
Why a single elected official cannot do it
Kansas local governments act through their governing bodies as a whole. An individual council member, mayor, or commissioner generally lacks unilateral authority to place a question on the ballot. The city council (for Topeka) or Board of County Commissioners (for Shawnee County) would need to adopt a resolution or take formal action.
What kinds of questions can go on the ballot
- Statutory questions (sales taxes, certain bonds, charter ordinances/resolutions, form-of-government changes, etc.) have clear paths under Kansas law and can be referred by the governing body (or forced by petition in some cases).
- Advisory (non-binding) questions are possible under city constitutional home rule and county statutory home rule. Attorney General opinions have recognized that cities and counties may call non-binding advisory elections on public issues, provided they serve a public purpose and do not improperly delegate legislative power.
- A pure “should we allow data centers?” policy question would almost certainly be advisory only. Zoning and conditional-use permit decisions are typically handled administratively/legislatively by the planning commission and governing body under existing ordinances; there is no general statutory right for voters to override those via referendum on an individual project.
Shawnee County has already moved data centers and battery energy storage into a Conditional Use Permit process (with higher fees and escrow requirements). Topeka imposed a one-year moratorium. Those processes continue on their own track and include public hearings.
Timing problem for the November 3, 2026 general election
It is already August 11. Key practical constraints include:
- Ballot preparation and certification deadlines occur well before Election Day.
- Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA) ballots must be transmitted by roughly mid-to-late September.
- Election offices need time to design, proof, print, and program ballots and voting equipment.
Even if the full Topeka City Council or Shawnee County Commission acted immediately, adding a brand-new local question this late would be extremely difficult (and in many cases impossible without a special election). Special elections are costly and still require statutory or home-rule authority plus coordination with the county election commissioner.
Realistic options if officials wanted public input
- The governing body could schedule additional public hearings or workshops.
- They could explore a future advisory question for a later election (next available regular or specially called election with proper notice).
- Citizens can use initiative/referendum tools available in cities under home-rule rules (signature thresholds and timelines apply; they are not instantaneous).
- Ongoing Conditional Use Permit reviews already require public notice and input opportunities.
In short: one elected official cannot put it on this November’s ballot. The full body would face both legal-authority questions (binding vs. advisory) and severe timing constraints. The existing CUP and moratorium processes are the current mechanisms for deciding these projects, with public participation already built in. For precise local deadlines or procedures, the Shawnee County Election Office or city/county legal counsel would be the authoritative sources.
Compass Datacenters (often styled Compass Datacenters) is a private U.S.-based developer, owner, and operator of hyperscale and wholesale data center campuses. It focuses on large-scale, long-lived facilities primarily for cloud providers and hyperscalers.
Key Facts
- Founded: 2011 by Chris Crosby (former senior VP at Digital Realty with a modular data center background). He remains CEO.
- Headquarters: Dallas, Texas (14555 N. Dallas Parkway, Suite 125).
- Ownership: Acquired in 2023 by Brookfield Infrastructure Partners and Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan (from prior owners including RedBird Capital Partners and Azrieli Group) in a deal valued around $5.5 billion. KKR is also listed among backers in more recent company descriptions.
- Business model: Emphasizes an “industrialized” or manufacturing-style approach. Roughly 85% of each data center is prefabricated off-site using a standardized kit-of-parts for faster, more predictable delivery, better quality control, lower risk, and improved safety versus traditional stick-built construction. The company promotes a “100-year campus” / long-term neighbor philosophy, community investment, low water use (closed-loop cooling), and sustainability metrics.
Markets and Scale
Compass develops multi-building campuses rather than one-off facilities. Active or developing sites (as of recent company information) include:
- Dallas–Fort Worth (major presence in Red Oak, Texas; campus expansion toward ~360 MW)
- Phoenix area (Goodyear ~212 MW, El Mirage ~108 MW)
- Chicago area (Hoffman Estates, former Sears headquarters site, ~200 MW)
- Northern Virginia (Loudoun County campus)
- Meridian, Mississippi (broke ground 2025, ~320 MW)
- Toronto area
- Milan, Italy
- Presence or projects historically noted in Israel and other locations
It has operated or developed on the order of ~16–17 campuses/sites with significant contracted capacity (hundreds of MW to over 1 GW range across the portfolio in recent descriptions).
Recent Activity and Positioning (2025–2026)
- Strong growth recognition (Inc. 5000 list multiple times; Financial Times fastest-growing companies ranking).
- Financing activity including asset-backed securities (ABS) deals tied to stabilized Phoenix and Toronto facilities and Red Oak campuses.
- Community-focused moves: $12.6 million building donation to Texas State Technical College for a data-center workforce training program (MEI pathway) in Red Oak; proposed $15 million contribution toward a new Ellis County animal shelter amid local data-center opposition.
- Partnerships with suppliers such as Schneider Electric (prefabricated white-space modules), Vertiv, and others for power, cooling, and modular solutions.
- Public stance on industry pushback: CEO Chris Crosby has argued against blanket bans/moratoria on data centers and in favor of higher, uniform standards for water use, grid impact, community benefits, and accountability (including recent comments aligned with Texas Gov. Abbott’s positions).
- Pulled out of the large Prince William Digital Gateway project in Virginia in 2026 amid prolonged local opposition and related challenges.
In short, Compass is a mid-to-large player in the hyperscale data center space that differentiates itself through standardized, prefabricated construction methods, institutional backing, and an explicit emphasis on long-term community partnership and operational sustainability. Its official site is compassdatacenters.com.
RE: Subject: Request Regarding Ownership of GO Topeka Land Holdings
Good afternoon 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: Tuesday, August 11, 2026 11:17 AM
To: Kevin Cook <kevin.cook@snco.us>; Karen A. Hiller <khiller@topeka.org>; MCRE Media <mcre1.9999@blogger.com>
Cc: Governing Body <governingbody@topeka.org>; Robert M. Perez <rmperez@topeka.org>; Bill Riphahn <bill.riphahn@snco.us>; aaron.mays@snco.us
Subject: Subject: Request Regarding Ownership of GO Topeka Land Holdings
|
Notice: -----This message was sent by an external sender-----
|
Dear Councilmember Hiller and Commissioner Cook,
I am writing regarding the approximately 230+ acres of land currently titled to Growth Organization of Topeka/Shawnee County, Inc. (GO Topeka), particularly the large tracts in the Central Crossing Commerce Park area along SW 49th Street and the parcel near Wakarusa.
These properties were acquired and held using public economic development resources. In my view, land of this nature should not remain under the permanent control of a private nonprofit. It should be deeded back to the City of Topeka, Shawnee County, or held collectively by JEDO so that elected officials — and ultimately the voters — retain clear public oversight.
GO Topeka currently exercises significant discretion over these assets with limited direct accountability to the public. That arrangement has allowed the organization to operate with a level of independence that, in practice, can feel like a stranglehold on the community’s ability to set its own economic development priorities. Those days need to end.
I respectfully ask that you consider initiating a formal review of these land holdings and explore transferring title to the appropriate public body (City, County, or JEDO). Public land acquired with public funds should remain under public control.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. I am available to discuss it further if helpful.
Sincerely,
Henry McClure
Topeka, Kansas
MCRE, LLC
3625 SW 29th Street
Topeka KS 66614
785.383.9994