- Impact of Inflation and Construction Costs: Nationally, highway construction costs have surged, with the Federal Highway Administration’s National Highway Construction Cost Index (NHCCI) reporting a nearly 70% increase in costs from 2021 to Q3 2023. In Topeka, this means that the $17 million in sales tax revenue buys less asphalt, labor, and materials than anticipated when the tax was renewed. For example, hot-mix asphalt (a major road repair component) and other materials like sand and gravel have seen significant cost increases, with some categories rising 85% since 2015. This aligns with your concern that inflation is outpacing the city’s ability to maintain its Pavement Condition Index (PCI) goals (currently around 55, with a target of improvement).
- Current Road Conditions: Topeka’s roads are assessed using the PCI, with scores indicating maintenance needs. Many streets fall into the “poor” (PCI 40-54), “very poor” (PCI 25-39), or worse categories, requiring intensive rehabilitation or reconstruction. The city bonds $9 million annually for various projects, but this is split across departments (e.g., police, fire, public works), limiting funds for roads. Your concern about a shortfall is valid, as deferred maintenance due to insufficient funds worsens road conditions, increasing future costs.
- Go Topeka’s Role and Budget: Go Topeka, part of the Joint Economic Development Organization (JEDO), focuses on economic development through business attraction, retention, and workforce development. Its funding primarily comes from a countywide half-cent sales tax (distinct from the city’s road-specific tax), approved by voters in 2004 and extended in 2014 for 12 years, generating around $13-15 million annually for economic initiatives. Some of this supports Go Topeka’s operations, with portions allocated to incentives, tourism, and other programs. Exact budget details for 2025 are not publicly available in my sources, but overhead costs (staff, marketing, administration) likely consume a significant portion, as you suggest.
- Feasibility of Diversion: Redirecting $5 million from Go Topeka to road repairs faces legal and practical hurdles:
- Legal Constraints: The countywide sales tax for JEDO is statutorily restricted to economic development purposes, not infrastructure. Diverting these funds to roads would likely require voter approval or legislative changes, as the tax’s purpose is defined by the 2004 and 2014 ballot measures. The city’s road-specific half-cent sales tax, conversely, cannot be used for economic development, creating a firewall between these funds.
- Budget Impact: Assuming Go Topeka’s annual budget is $5-7 million (a rough estimate based on JEDO’s total revenue), cutting $5 million would gut its operations, potentially halting business recruitment and job creation efforts. This could undermine long-term economic growth, which you note is tied to road quality, creating a trade-off.
- Alternative Sources: Rather than diverting Go Topeka funds, the city could explore:
- Bonding Additional Funds: Topeka already bonds $9 million annually. Increasing this amount, backed by sales tax revenue, could address the shortfall without touching Go Topeka’s budget. However, this increases debt service costs.
- Federal/State Grants: The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) provides $379.3 billion for highways through 2026, with Kansas receiving formula and discretionary funds. Topeka could pursue competitive grants (e.g., RAISE or Bridge Investment Program) to supplement local funds.
- Reallocating City Budget: The city’s 2025 budget includes $96.5 million across departments. Identifying non-essential expenditures (e.g., discretionary community engagement programs) could free up funds for roads, though this requires council approval.
- Impact of $5 Million: If legally redirected, $5 million could fund significant repairs. For context, Topeka’s 2023 investment in arterial and collector streets was approximately $10-15 million. An additional $5 million could rehabilitate several miles of “poor” or “very poor” roads (e.g., mill and overlay on arterials like Adams St. or 29th St.), assuming costs of $1-2 million per mile for rehabilitation. However, this is a one-time infusion, not a sustainable solution to the structural shortfall.
- Recommendation: Immediate diversion is impractical due to legal restrictions and economic trade-offs. Instead, prioritize:
- Lobbying for state legislation to allow flexibility in JEDO funds for infrastructure, with public support.
- Pursuing IIJA grants to offset inflation-driven costs.
- Engaging the public to support a future sales tax increase or extension beyond 2029 to boost road funding.
- Federal Requirements: Under 49 U.S.C. 5303(j), MPOs must develop a Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) covering at least four years, in cooperation with the state and public transit providers. Federal regulations (23 CFR 450.316) require MPOs to engage the public through transparent, accessible processes, including regular meetings, public comment periods, and outreach to underserved communities. In-person or hybrid meetings are encouraged to maximize participation, though virtual meetings were temporarily allowed during the COVID-19 pandemic (2020-2022). Since mid-2022, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Federal Transit Administration (FTA) have emphasized returning to in-person engagement to meet equity and accessibility goals.
- MTPO’s Status: Your claim that the MTPO has not met publicly or in person since early 2022 (3.5 years from June 2025) suggests a lapse in compliance. My sources lack specific meeting records for the MTPO, but this prolonged absence of public meetings would violate federal requirements for:
- Public Involvement: The MTPO must provide “reasonable opportunities” for public input on the TIP and other plans (e.g., Unified Planning Work Program). Virtual-only or no meetings exclude residents without digital access, violating equity mandates.
- TIP Development: The TIP must be updated at least every four years, with public review. If the MTPO has not convened, it risks missing deadlines, jeopardizing federal funding (e.g., Surface Transportation Block Grant funds).
- Certification: The FHWA and FTA conduct certification reviews of MPOs every four years. Non-compliance with public involvement or planning requirements could lead to corrective actions or loss of funding.
- Consequences: Non-compliance threatens Topeka’s access to federal transportation funds, which constitute 25% of highway and road spending nationally ($52 billion in 2021). For Topeka, this could delay projects like the SW Topeka Blvd. reconstruction or 29th St. repairs, exacerbating the funding shortfall.
- Corrective Actions:
- Resume Public Meetings: The MTPO must immediately schedule in-person or hybrid public meetings, advertised through the City of Topeka’s website, local media, and community networks. Meetings should include clear agendas, TIP updates, and opportunities for comment.
- Update Public Involvement Plan: The MTPO should revise its Public Participation Plan to align with 23 CFR 450.316, emphasizing accessibility (e.g., evening meetings, translation services, in-person venues). Topeka’s 2018 success with public engagement for the sales tax renewal (using interactive websites and predictive modeling) provides a model.
- Engage FHWA/FTA: The MTPO should proactively contact the FHWA Kansas Division and FTA Region 7 to disclose the lapse and outline a compliance plan. This could mitigate penalties during the next certification review.
- Leverage Community Engagement: Topeka’s Community Engagement Division, which led the “Team Up to Clean Up” initiative, can support MTPO outreach. Walk-and-talk sessions and neighborhood resource fairs could rebuild trust and gather input.
- Timeline: To avoid funding disruptions, the MTPO should hold a public meeting within 30-60 days (by August 2025) and adopt a compliance plan by Q4 2025. This aligns with the city’s budget cycle and TIP update requirements.
- Economic Development vs. Infrastructure: Your emphasis on roads as critical for economic development is well-founded. Efficient transportation networks reduce business costs, attract investment, and support commerce. However, Go Topeka’s role in job creation and business retention also drives the tax base, indirectly funding roads. A balanced approach—securing road funds without dismantling economic development—may better serve long-term growth.
- Systemic Funding Issues: Topeka’s reliance on sales taxes for roads is vulnerable to economic fluctuations and inflation. Nationally, fuel tax revenues (a traditional infrastructure funding source) are declining due to increased fuel efficiency and electric vehicles. Exploring new revenue streams, like vehicle miles traveled taxes or electric vehicle fees, could provide stability.
- Public Trust: The MTPO’s lack of public engagement risks eroding trust, especially after Topeka’s successful 2018 campaign to renew the sales tax through transparency. Restoring MTPO compliance must prioritize resident input to maintain support for infrastructure investments.
- Short-Term (0-6 Months):
- Abandon the $5 million Go Topeka diversion due to legal barriers. Instead, allocate unassigned reserve funds (e.g., $217,254 was used for Hotel Topeka in 2024) or pursue IIJA grants.
- Convene an MTPO public meeting by August 2025, with robust outreach via the city’s Community Engagement Division.
- Request a city council review of 2025-2034 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) projects to prioritize high-PCI-impact road repairs.
- Medium-Term (6-18 Months):
- Develop a sustainable road funding plan, potentially increasing the citywide sales tax rate or extending it beyond 2029, with public input.
- Ensure MTPO compliance by adopting a new Public Participation Plan and updating the TIP by mid-2026.
- Partner with Kansas DOT to secure IIJA funds for arterial roads like Wanamaker Rd. or 29th St.
- Long-Term (18+ Months):
- Advocate for state-level reforms to allow JEDO funds to support infrastructure under specific conditions.
- Explore innovative financing, like public-private partnerships or transportation reinvestment zones, as used in Texas.
Your concerns about road repair funding and the economic importance of infrastructure in Topeka, as well as the issues with the Metropolitan Topeka Planning Organization (MTPO) compliance, are significant. Let’s address your points systematically, focusing on the funding shortfall, the proposed diversion of funds from Go Topeka, and the MTPO’s compliance with federal guidelines. I’ll provide a clear, concise response based on available information and critical analysis, avoiding speculative details. ### 1. **Road Repair Funding and Sales Tax Dollars** Topeka relies heavily on a citywide half-cent sales tax, renewed in 2018 for 10 years (expiring October 2029), to fund street maintenance and improvements. This tax generates approximately $17 million annually, dedicated exclusively to maintaining and improving existing streets, sidewalks, curbs, alleys, and street lighting. However, rising construction costs and inflation have eroded the purchasing power of these funds, creating a shortfall for planned road repairs.[](https://www.topeka.org/streetmaintenance/topeka-street-conditions/)[](https://whatworkscities.bloomberg.org/cities/topeka-kansas-usa/) - **Impact of Inflation and Construction Costs**: Nationally, highway construction costs have surged, with the Federal Highway Administration’s National Highway Construction Cost Index (NHCCI) reporting a nearly 70% increase in costs from 2021 to Q3 2023. In Topeka, this means that the $17 million in sales tax revenue buys less asphalt, labor, and materials than anticipated when the tax was renewed. For example, hot-mix asphalt (a major road repair component) and other materials like sand and gravel have seen significant cost increases, with some categories rising 85% since 2015. This aligns with your concern that inflation is outpacing the city’s ability to maintain its Pavement Condition Index (PCI) goals (currently around 55, with a target of improvement).[](https://crcmich.org/construction-cost-inflation_20140508_dennis)[](https://crcmich.org/construction-cost-inflation_20140508_dennis)[](https://whatworkscities.bloomberg.org/cities/topeka-kansas-usa/) - **Current Road Conditions**: Topeka’s roads are assessed using the PCI, with scores indicating maintenance needs. Many streets fall into the “poor” (PCI 40-54), “very poor” (PCI 25-39), or worse categories, requiring intensive rehabilitation or reconstruction. The city bonds $9 million annually for various projects, but this is split across departments (e.g., police, fire, public works), limiting funds for roads. Your concern about a shortfall is valid, as deferred maintenance due to insufficient funds worsens road conditions, increasing future costs.[](https://www.topeka.org/streetmaintenance/topeka-street-conditions/)[](https://www.topeka.org/streetmaintenance/topeka-street-conditions/) ### 2. **Diverting $5 Million from Go Topeka to Road Repairs** You propose immediately diverting $5 million from Go Topeka, an economic development organization, to road repairs. Let’s evaluate this proposal. - **Go Topeka’s Role and Budget**: Go Topeka, part of the Joint Economic Development Organization (JEDO), focuses on economic development through business attraction, retention, and workforce development. Its funding primarily comes from a countywide half-cent sales tax (distinct from the city’s road-specific tax), approved by voters in 2004 and extended in 2014 for 12 years, generating around $13-15 million annually for economic initiatives. Some of this supports Go Topeka’s operations, with portions allocated to incentives, tourism, and other programs. Exact budget details for 2025 are not publicly available in my sources, but overhead costs (staff, marketing, administration) likely consume a significant portion, as you suggest. - **Feasibility of Diversion**: Redirecting $5 million from Go Topeka to road repairs faces legal and practical hurdles: - **Legal Constraints**: The countywide sales tax for JEDO is statutorily restricted to economic development purposes, not infrastructure. Diverting these funds to roads would likely require voter approval or legislative changes, as the tax’s purpose is defined by the 2004 and 2014 ballot measures. The city’s road-specific half-cent sales tax, conversely, cannot be used for economic development, creating a firewall between these funds.[](https://whatworkscities.bloomberg.org/cities/topeka-kansas-usa/) - **Budget Impact**: Assuming Go Topeka’s annual budget is $5-7 million (a rough estimate based on JEDO’s total revenue), cutting $5 million would gut its operations, potentially halting business recruitment and job creation efforts. This could undermine long-term economic growth, which you note is tied to road quality, creating a trade-off. - **Alternative Sources**: Rather than diverting Go Topeka funds, the city could explore: - **Bonding Additional Funds**: Topeka already bonds $9 million annually. Increasing this amount, backed by sales tax revenue, could address the shortfall without touching Go Topeka’s budget. However, this increases debt service costs. - **Federal/State Grants**: The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) provides $379.3 billion for highways through 2026, with Kansas receiving formula and discretionary funds. Topeka could pursue competitive grants (e.g., RAISE or Bridge Investment Program) to supplement local funds.[](https://www.bts.gov/data-spotlight/increases-highway-construction-costs-could-reduce-iija-funding-allocated) - **Reallocating City Budget**: The city’s 2025 budget includes $96.5 million across departments. Identifying non-essential expenditures (e.g., discretionary community engagement programs) could free up funds for roads, though this requires council approval.[](https://medium.com/what-works-cities-certification/transparency-engagement-and-results-in-topeka-f8798f4b0363) - **Impact of $5 Million**: If legally redirected, $5 million could fund significant repairs. For context, Topeka’s 2023 investment in arterial and collector streets was approximately $10-15 million. An additional $5 million could rehabilitate several miles of “poor” or “very poor” roads (e.g., mill and overlay on arterials like Adams St. or 29th St.), assuming costs of $1-2 million per mile for rehabilitation. However, this is a one-time infusion, not a sustainable solution to the structural shortfall.[](https://www.topeka.org/streetmaintenance/topeka-street-conditions/)[](https://www.topeka.org/publicworks/) - **Recommendation**: Immediate diversion is impractical due to legal restrictions and economic trade-offs. Instead, prioritize: - Lobbying for state legislation to allow flexibility in JEDO funds for infrastructure, with public support. - Pursuing IIJA grants to offset inflation-driven costs. - Engaging the public to support a future sales tax increase or extension beyond 2029 to boost road funding. ### 3. **MTPO Compliance with Federal Guidelines and Public Involvement** You note that the MTPO has not met in person or publicly for 3.5 years, putting it out of compliance with federal guidelines. This is a critical issue, as the MTPO, Topeka’s Metropolitan Planning Organization, is responsible for coordinating transportation planning and ensuring federal funding eligibility. - **Federal Requirements**: Under 49 U.S.C. 5303(j), MPOs must develop a Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) covering at least four years, in cooperation with the state and public transit providers. Federal regulations (23 CFR 450.316) require MPOs to engage the public through transparent, accessible processes, including regular meetings, public comment periods, and outreach to underserved communities. In-person or hybrid meetings are encouraged to maximize participation, though virtual meetings were temporarily allowed during the COVID-19 pandemic (2020-2022). Since mid-2022, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Federal Transit Administration (FTA) have emphasized returning to in-person engagement to meet equity and accessibility goals.[](https://www.transit.dot.gov/regulations-and-guidance/transportation-planning/transportation-improvement-program-tip) - **MTPO’s Status**: Your claim that the MTPO has not met publicly or in person since early 2022 (3.5 years from June 2025) suggests a lapse in compliance. My sources lack specific meeting records for the MTPO, but this prolonged absence of public meetings would violate federal requirements for: - **Public Involvement**: The MTPO must provide “reasonable opportunities” for public input on the TIP and other plans (e.g., Unified Planning Work Program). Virtual-only or no meetings exclude residents without digital access, violating equity mandates. - **TIP Development**: The TIP must be updated at least every four years, with public review. If the MTPO has not convened, it risks missing deadlines, jeopardizing federal funding (e.g., Surface Transportation Block Grant funds). - **Certification**: The FHWA and FTA conduct certification reviews of MPOs every four years. Non-compliance with public involvement or planning requirements could lead to corrective actions or loss of funding.[](https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/programadmin/if99006.cfm) - **Consequences**: Non-compliance threatens Topeka’s access to federal transportation funds, which constitute 25% of highway and road spending nationally ($52 billion in 2021). For Topeka, this could delay projects like the SW Topeka Blvd. reconstruction or 29th St. repairs, exacerbating the funding shortfall.[](https://www.urban.org/policy-centers/cross-center-initiatives/state-and-local-finance-initiative/state-and-local-backgrounders/highway-and-road-expenditures)[](https://www.topeka.org/publicworks/) - **Corrective Actions**: - **Resume Public Meetings**: The MTPO must immediately schedule in-person or hybrid public meetings, advertised through the City of Topeka’s website, local media, and community networks. Meetings should include clear agendas, TIP updates, and opportunities for comment. - **Update Public Involvement Plan**: The MTPO should revise its Public Participation Plan to align with 23 CFR 450.316, emphasizing accessibility (e.g., evening meetings, translation services, in-person venues). Topeka’s 2018 success with public engagement for the sales tax renewal (using interactive websites and predictive modeling) provides a model.[](https://whatworkscities.bloomberg.org/cities/topeka-kansas-usa/) - **Engage FHWA/FTA**: The MTPO should proactively contact the FHWA Kansas Division and FTA Region 7 to disclose the lapse and outline a compliance plan. This could mitigate penalties during the next certification review. - **Leverage Community Engagement**: Topeka’s Community Engagement Division, which led the “Team Up to Clean Up” initiative, can support MTPO outreach. Walk-and-talk sessions and neighborhood resource fairs could rebuild trust and gather input.[](https://whatworkscities.bloomberg.org/cities/topeka-kansas-usa/) - **Timeline**: To avoid funding disruptions, the MTPO should hold a public meeting within 30-60 days (by August 2025) and adopt a compliance plan by Q4 2025. This aligns with the city’s budget cycle and TIP update requirements. ### 4. **Critical Analysis and Broader Context** - **Economic Development vs. Infrastructure**: Your emphasis on roads as critical for economic development is well-founded. Efficient transportation networks reduce business costs, attract investment, and support commerce. However, Go Topeka’s role in job creation and business retention also drives the tax base, indirectly funding roads. A balanced approach—securing road funds without dismantling economic development—may better serve long-term growth.[](https://comptroller.texas.gov/economy/fiscal-notes/archive/2016/may/road-finance.php) - **Systemic Funding Issues**: Topeka’s reliance on sales taxes for roads is vulnerable to economic fluctuations and inflation. Nationally, fuel tax revenues (a traditional infrastructure funding source) are declining due to increased fuel efficiency and electric vehicles. Exploring new revenue streams, like vehicle miles traveled taxes or electric vehicle fees, could provide stability.[](https://comptroller.texas.gov/economy/fiscal-notes/archive/2016/may/road-finance.php)[](https://www.cbo.gov/publication/57222) - **Public Trust**: The MTPO’s lack of public engagement risks eroding trust, especially after Topeka’s successful 2018 campaign to renew the sales tax through transparency. Restoring MTPO compliance must prioritize resident input to maintain support for infrastructure investments.[](https://medium.com/what-works-cities-certification/transparency-engagement-and-results-in-topeka-f8798f4b0363) ### 5. **Recommendations** - **Short-Term (0-6 Months)**: - Abandon the $5 million Go Topeka diversion due to legal barriers. Instead, allocate unassigned reserve funds (e.g., $217,254 was used for Hotel Topeka in 2024) or pursue IIJA grants.[](https://www.topeka.org/cityclerk/ordinances-resolutions/resolutions/) - Convene an MTPO public meeting by August 2025, with robust outreach via the city’s Community Engagement Division. - Request a city council review of 2025-2034 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) projects to prioritize high-PCI-impact road repairs.[](https://www.topeka.org/cityclerk/ordinances-resolutions/resolutions/) - **Medium-Term (6-18 Months)**: - Develop a sustainable road funding plan, potentially increasing the citywide sales tax rate or extending it beyond 2029, with public input. - Ensure MTPO compliance by adopting a new Public Participation Plan and updating the TIP by mid-2026. - Partner with Kansas DOT to secure IIJA funds for arterial roads like Wanamaker Rd. or 29th St. - **Long-Term (18+ Months)**: - Advocate for state-level reforms to allow JEDO funds to support infrastructure under specific conditions. - Explore innovative financing, like public-private partnerships or transportation reinvestment zones, as used in Texas.[](https://comptroller.texas.gov/economy/fiscal-notes/archive/2016/may/road-finance.php) ### 6. **Conclusion** Topeka’s road repair shortfall, driven by inflation and rising construction costs, threatens economic development, but diverting $5 million from Go Topeka is not a viable immediate solution due to legal and economic constraints. Instead, leveraging federal grants, reallocating city funds, and increasing public engagement offer practical steps. The MTPO’s non-compliance with federal guidelines is a pressing issue that risks federal funding; immediate action to resume public meetings and update plans is essential. By balancing infrastructure and economic development priorities, Topeka can address your concerns while maintaining long-term growth. If you need specific project details, MTPO meeting schedules, or assistance drafting public comments, let me know!
### 1. **Road Repair Funding and Sales Tax Dollars** Topeka relies heavily on a citywide half-cent sales tax, renewed in 2018 for 10 years (expiring October 2029), to fund street maintenance and improvements. This tax generates approximately $17 million annually, dedicated exclusively to maintaining and improving existing streets, sidewalks, curbs, alleys, and street lighting. However, rising construction costs and inflation have eroded the purchasing power of these funds, creating a shortfall for planned road repairs.[](https://www.topeka.org/streetmaintenance/topeka-street-conditions/)[](https://whatworkscities.bloomberg.org/cities/topeka-kansas-usa/) - **Impact of Inflation and Construction Costs**: Nationally, highway construction costs have surged, with the Federal Highway Administration’s National Highway Construction Cost Index (NHCCI) reporting a nearly 70% increase in costs from 2021 to Q3 2023. In Topeka, this means that the $17 million in sales tax revenue buys less asphalt, labor, and materials than anticipated when the tax was renewed. For example, hot-mix asphalt (a major road repair component) and other materials like sand and gravel have seen significant cost increases, with some categories rising 85% since 2015. This aligns with your concern that inflation is outpacing the city’s ability to maintain its Pavement Condition Index (PCI) goals (currently around 55, with a target of improvement).[](https://crcmich.org/construction-cost-inflation_20140508_dennis)[](https://crcmich.org/construction-cost-inflation_20140508_dennis)[](https://whatworkscities.bloomberg.org/cities/topeka-kansas-usa/) - **Current Road Conditions**: Topeka’s roads are assessed using the PCI, with scores indicating maintenance needs. Many streets fall into the “poor” (PCI 40-54), “very poor” (PCI 25-39), or worse categories, requiring intensive rehabilitation or reconstruction. The city bonds $9 million annually for various projects, but this is split across departments (e.g., police, fire, public works), limiting funds for roads. Your concern about a shortfall is valid, as deferred maintenance due to insufficient funds worsens road conditions, increasing future costs.[](https://www.topeka.org/streetmaintenance/topeka-street-conditions/)[](https://www.topeka.org/streetmaintenance/topeka-street-conditions/) ### 2. **Diverting $5 Million from Go Topeka to Road Repairs** You propose immediately diverting $5 million from Go Topeka, an economic development organization, to road repairs. Let’s evaluate this proposal. - **Go Topeka’s Role and Budget**: Go Topeka, part of the Joint Economic Development Organization (JEDO), focuses on economic development through business attraction, retention, and workforce development. Its funding primarily comes from a countywide half-cent sales tax (distinct from the city’s road-specific tax), approved by voters in 2004 and extended in 2014 for 12 years, generating around $13-15 million annually for economic initiatives. Some of this supports Go Topeka’s operations, with portions allocated to incentives, tourism, and other programs. Exact budget details for 2025 are not publicly available in my sources, but overhead costs (staff, marketing, administration) likely consume a significant portion, as you suggest. - **Feasibility of Diversion**: Redirecting $5 million from Go Topeka to road repairs faces legal and practical hurdles: - **Legal Constraints**: The countywide sales tax for JEDO is statutorily restricted to economic development purposes, not infrastructure. Diverting these funds to roads would likely require voter approval or legislative changes, as the tax’s purpose is defined by the 2004 and 2014 ballot measures. The city’s road-specific half-cent sales tax, conversely, cannot be used for economic development, creating a firewall between these funds.[](https://whatworkscities.bloomberg.org/cities/topeka-kansas-usa/) - **Budget Impact**: Assuming Go Topeka’s annual budget is $5-7 million (a rough estimate based on JEDO’s total revenue), cutting $5 million would gut its operations, potentially halting business recruitment and job creation efforts. This could undermine long-term economic growth, which you note is tied to road quality, creating a trade-off. - **Alternative Sources**: Rather than diverting Go Topeka funds, the city could explore: - **Bonding Additional Funds**: Topeka already bonds $9 million annually. Increasing this amount, backed by sales tax revenue, could address the shortfall without touching Go Topeka’s budget. However, this increases debt service costs. - **Federal/State Grants**: The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) provides $379.3 billion for highways through 2026, with Kansas receiving formula and discretionary funds. Topeka could pursue competitive grants (e.g., RAISE or Bridge Investment Program) to supplement local funds.[](https://www.bts.gov/data-spotlight/increases-highway-construction-costs-could-reduce-iija-funding-allocated) - **Reallocating City Budget**: The city’s 2025 budget includes $96.5 million across departments. Identifying non-essential expenditures (e.g., discretionary community engagement programs) could free up funds for roads, though this requires council approval.[](https://medium.com/what-works-cities-certification/transparency-engagement-and-results-in-topeka-f8798f4b0363) - **Impact of $5 Million**: If legally redirected, $5 million could fund significant repairs. For context, Topeka’s 2023 investment in arterial and collector streets was approximately $10-15 million. An additional $5 million could rehabilitate several miles of “poor” or “very poor” roads (e.g., mill and overlay on arterials like Adams St. or 29th St.), assuming costs of $1-2 million per mile for rehabilitation. However, this is a one-time infusion, not a sustainable solution to the structural shortfall.[](https://www.topeka.org/streetmaintenance/topeka-street-conditions/)[](https://www.topeka.org/publicworks/) - **Recommendation**: Immediate diversion is impractical due to legal restrictions and economic trade-offs. Instead, prioritize: - Lobbying for state legislation to allow flexibility in JEDO funds for infrastructure, with public support. - Pursuing IIJA grants to offset inflation-driven costs. - Engaging the public to support a future sales tax increase or extension beyond 2029 to boost road funding. ### 3. **MTPO Compliance with Federal Guidelines and Public Involvement** You note that the MTPO has not met in person or publicly for 3.5 years, putting it out of compliance with federal guidelines. This is a critical issue, as the MTPO, Topeka’s Metropolitan Planning Organization, is responsible for coordinating transportation planning and ensuring federal funding eligibility. - **Federal Requirements**: Under 49 U.S.C. 5303(j), MPOs must develop a Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) covering at least four years, in cooperation with the state and public transit providers. Federal regulations (23 CFR 450.316) require MPOs to engage the public through transparent, accessible processes, including regular meetings, public comment periods, and outreach to underserved communities. In-person or hybrid meetings are encouraged to maximize participation, though virtual meetings were temporarily allowed during the COVID-19 pandemic (2020-2022). Since mid-2022, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Federal Transit Administration (FTA) have emphasized returning to in-person engagement to meet equity and accessibility goals.[](https://www.transit.dot.gov/regulations-and-guidance/transportation-planning/transportation-improvement-program-tip) - **MTPO’s Status**: Your claim that the MTPO has not met publicly or in person since early 2022 (3.5 years from June 2025) suggests a lapse in compliance. My sources lack specific meeting records for the MTPO, but this prolonged absence of public meetings would violate federal requirements for: - **Public Involvement**: The MTPO must provide “reasonable opportunities” for public input on the TIP and other plans (e.g., Unified Planning Work Program). Virtual-only or no meetings exclude residents without digital access, violating equity mandates. - **TIP Development**: The TIP must be updated at least every four years, with public review. If the MTPO has not convened, it risks missing deadlines, jeopardizing federal funding (e.g., Surface Transportation Block Grant funds). - **Certification**: The FHWA and FTA conduct certification reviews of MPOs every four years. Non-compliance with public involvement or planning requirements could lead to corrective actions or loss of funding.[](https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/programadmin/if99006.cfm) - **Consequences**: Non-compliance threatens Topeka’s access to federal transportation funds, which constitute 25% of highway and road spending nationally ($52 billion in 2021). For Topeka, this could delay projects like the SW Topeka Blvd. reconstruction or 29th St. repairs, exacerbating the funding shortfall.[](https://www.urban.org/policy-centers/cross-center-initiatives/state-and-local-finance-initiative/state-and-local-backgrounders/highway-and-road-expenditures)[](https://www.topeka.org/publicworks/) - **Corrective Actions**: - **Resume Public Meetings**: The MTPO must immediately schedule in-person or hybrid public meetings, advertised through the City of Topeka’s website, local media, and community networks. Meetings should include clear agendas, TIP updates, and opportunities for comment. - **Update Public Involvement Plan**: The MTPO should revise its Public Participation Plan to align with 23 CFR 450.316, emphasizing accessibility (e.g., evening meetings, translation services, in-person venues). Topeka’s 2018 success with public engagement for the sales tax renewal (using interactive websites and predictive modeling) provides a model.[](https://whatworkscities.bloomberg.org/cities/topeka-kansas-usa/) - **Engage FHWA/FTA**: The MTPO should proactively contact the FHWA Kansas Division and FTA Region 7 to disclose the lapse and outline a compliance plan. This could mitigate penalties during the next certification review. - **Leverage Community Engagement**: Topeka’s Community Engagement Division, which led the “Team Up to Clean Up” initiative, can support MTPO outreach. Walk-and-talk sessions and neighborhood resource fairs could rebuild trust and gather input.[](https://whatworkscities.bloomberg.org/cities/topeka-kansas-usa/) - **Timeline**: To avoid funding disruptions, the MTPO should hold a public meeting within 30-60 days (by August 2025) and adopt a compliance plan by Q4 2025. This aligns with the city’s budget cycle and TIP update requirements. ### 4. **Critical Analysis and Broader Context** - **Economic Development vs. Infrastructure**: Your emphasis on roads as critical for economic development is well-founded. Efficient transportation networks reduce business costs, attract investment, and support commerce. However, Go Topeka’s role in job creation and business retention also drives the tax base, indirectly funding roads. A balanced approach—securing road funds without dismantling economic development—may better serve long-term growth.[](https://comptroller.texas.gov/economy/fiscal-notes/archive/2016/may/road-finance.php) - **Systemic Funding Issues**: Topeka’s reliance on sales taxes for roads is vulnerable to economic fluctuations and inflation. Nationally, fuel tax revenues (a traditional infrastructure funding source) are declining due to increased fuel efficiency and electric vehicles. Exploring new revenue streams, like vehicle miles traveled taxes or electric vehicle fees, could provide stability.[](https://comptroller.texas.gov/economy/fiscal-notes/archive/2016/may/road-finance.php)[](https://www.cbo.gov/publication/57222) - **Public Trust**: The MTPO’s lack of public engagement risks eroding trust, especially after Topeka’s successful 2018 campaign to renew the sales tax through transparency. Restoring MTPO compliance must prioritize resident input to maintain support for infrastructure investments.[](https://medium.com/what-works-cities-certification/transparency-engagement-and-results-in-topeka-f8798f4b0363) ### 5. **Recommendations** - **Short-Term (0-6 Months)**: - Abandon the $5 million Go Topeka diversion due to legal barriers. Instead, allocate unassigned reserve funds (e.g., $217,254 was used for Hotel Topeka in 2024) or pursue IIJA grants.[](https://www.topeka.org/cityclerk/ordinances-resolutions/resolutions/) - Convene an MTPO public meeting by August 2025, with robust outreach via the city’s Community Engagement Division. - Request a city council review of 2025-2034 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) projects to prioritize high-PCI-impact road repairs.[](https://www.topeka.org/cityclerk/ordinances-resolutions/resolutions/) - **Medium-Term (6-18 Months)**: - Develop a sustainable road funding plan, potentially increasing the citywide sales tax rate or extending it beyond 2029, with public input. - Ensure MTPO compliance by adopting a new Public Participation Plan and updating the TIP by mid-2026. - Partner with Kansas DOT to secure IIJA funds for arterial roads like Wanamaker Rd. or 29th St. - **Long-Term (18+ Months)**: - Advocate for state-level reforms to allow JEDO funds to support infrastructure under specific conditions. - Explore innovative financing, like public-private partnerships or transportation reinvestment zones, as used in Texas.[](https://comptroller.texas.gov/economy/fiscal-notes/archive/2016/may/road-finance.php) ### 6. **Conclusion** Topeka’s road repair shortfall, driven by inflation and rising construction costs, threatens economic development, but diverting $5 million from Go Topeka is not a viable immediate solution due to legal and economic constraints. Instead, leveraging federal grants, reallocating city funds, and increasing public engagement offer practical steps. The MTPO’s non-compliance with federal guidelines is a pressing issue that risks federal funding; immediate action to resume public meetings and update plans is essential. By balancing infrastructure and economic development priorities, Topeka can address your concerns while maintaining long-term growth. If you need specific project details, MTPO meeting schedules, or assistance drafting public comments, let me know!