Task force asks Topeka and Shawnee County for $400,000 to jump-start riverfront revival

Task force leaders presented a phased plan to develop Topeka’s Kansas Riverfront and asked Topeka City and Shawnee County for $200,000 per year from each jurisdiction for two years — $400,000 total — toward an estimated $1.3 million Phase 1 project that would remove decades‑old steel from the river, extend a trail, and reuse on‑site buildings for an education and rental hub.

The request came Monday during a joint meeting of Topeka city and Shawnee County officials. John Hunter, task force chair, said the group has secured “emergency approval to remove the steel” after work with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and that removal is a top priority to make the river safe for boaters and kayakers. Hunter said the full permitting process for a new public boat ramp could still take about 18 months to two years.

The funding request is intended to cover early engineering, permitting and site work while the Riverfront Authority pursues private fundraising and foundation grants. “We’re making an ask of both the city and the county for a total of $400,000 — $200,000 per year over the next two years,” Hunter said. The task force proposes using the Greater Topeka Partnership Foundation as the fiscal agent and opening an account at Kaw Valley Bank to receive transfers and private donations.

Why it matters: task force leaders said opening the river could support recreation, education and economic development, including potential private redevelopment along the river. Officials also warned the project carries environmental, safety and budgetary uncertainties that will affect timing and cost.

Most important facts

- The task force estimated Phase 1 at about $1.3 million but described that figure as preliminary; leaders said the $400,000 request from the two governments is intended to leverage additional private and foundation funding.

- The Riverfront Authority says the Army Corps has granted an emergency approval to remove steel left in the river after a 1951 flood; Kevin Holland of CFS Engineers said Corps staff walked the river with the task force and will be involved in the removal plan.

- Boat‑ramp permitting and Corps coordination will likely require an engineering report and a formal permit application; the task force said that permitting could take 18 months to two years.

- Planned Phase 1 work includes steel removal, trail extension under a bridge and railroad crossing, reusing a city‑owned “blue office building” for a river education center and bike/kayak rentals, demolition of two small structures, and study of a warehouse for restrooms or storage. The county would assume maintenance of the property after development under an existing parks and recreation consolidation agreement referenced by the task force.

Funding and partnerships

The task force said it will pursue a three‑part funding approach: (1) requests to the city and county for the $400,000 ask; (2) hiring consultants or contractors paid through the task force if jurisdictions prefer not to use city/county personnel; and (3) private fundraising and foundation grants. John Hunter noted earlier fundraising material that used a $1.3 million planning figure and told officials the task force expects to seek the same donors who supported the Greater Topeka Partnership’s Momentum 2027 efforts.

Task force representatives named prospective partners including the Sunflower Foundation (task force members said the foundation indicated it could cover as much as half of some costs), the Greater Topeka Partnership Foundation (to receive donations as a 501(c)(3)), Kaw Valley Bank and Fidelity Bank (to hold accounts/treasury functions), and two out‑of‑state developers conducting due diligence.

Elected officials’ concerns and responses

Council members and commissioners expressed a mix of support for long‑term benefits and concern about near‑term costs and risks. Councilor Banks asked whether community feedback had been broadly positive; presenters said feasibility studies and previous visioning charettes produced strong interest. Councilwoman Valdivia Acala said she believes the project should be “100% funded by the private sector” and cited current city budget pressures. Deputy Mayor Kell (public safety concerns) warned that removing steel buried in the river after 70 years carries environmental unknowns and possible high cost; he asked whether bids existed for steel removal. Hunter and task force members replied that past bidding and Corps consultations have provided preliminary cost information and that some contractors have given estimates.

Kevin Holland, CFS Engineers co‑chair, said the Corps has experience with flood‑damaged bridges and that removing man‑made metal from the river is normally environmentally preferable, although he acknowledged the river’s sandbars and flow will shift after removal.

No vote or formal commitment

No motion or vote occurred. The presentation concluded with officials encouraging the task force to continue detailed engineering estimates and fundraising. The task force said it would return with refined cost estimates and fundraising progress; presenters emphasized the request must be considered through each jurisdiction’s budget process.

What’s next

The task force said it would seek engineering estimates for steel removal and permitting, pursue private and foundation funding including discussions with the Sunflower Foundation, and coordinate with the Army Corps for removal work. Officials noted that any city or county funding would be reviewed during upcoming budget cycles and that the task force’s timeline depends on permit approvals and fundraising.

Ending

The joint meeting moved on to public comment and other business; no formal action was taken on the funding request.