KCK could soon pull the plug on project meant to revive old mall. What happened?
Wyandotte County Commissioners must soon decide whether they’re going to boot a long-awaited — and long-stalled — project intended to revitalize Midtown Kansas City, Kansas.
But the KCK resident who has spearheaded the project has an issue with the way negotiations have been presented publicly. And he hopes to keep officials from killing his plans.
The local government’s Economic Development and Finance Commission on Monday evening moved forward a recommendation to rescind Eastside Innovation’s request for proposal to build its Midtown Station project, after months of talks going nowhere.
The billion-dollar development, slated to bring various housing styles, retail space, a solar micro-grid and more to the former site of Indian Springs Mall, would not be built if the full commission approves that recommendation during a later public meeting.
As of Tuesday afternoon, that project was not listed for final consideration on an upcoming public agenda. Government leadership say the item will likely not be addressed during this Thursday’s commission meeting, but rather at another meeting later this month.
During Monday’s meeting, Todd LaSala, an attorney representing the Unified Government of Wyandotte County and KCK, told committee members that although parties negotiating the deal were closer to reaching a compromise over how much the government-owned land the project would be built on should sell for, they are at a disagreement over how that should be paid over time.
His report followed a June 1 meeting during which the same economic development commission voted to direct staff to continue trying to reach an agreement for the project after they’d hit a stalemate over the price of the land.
Meanwhile, Erik Murray of Eastside Innovation has said that government staff did not accurately portray the ways negotiations went down behind the scenes during that meeting, and that the committee did not allow residents to speak in support of the project.
Sale price a longtime sticking point
Disagreements over how much the property should cost, located on several acres off State Avenue and I-635, have contributed to parties’ inability to reach a development agreement.
The Unified Government, which has said it has put tens of millions into the property since acquiring, then demolishing the Indian Springs Mall, has said it wants Eastside to pay $6 million for it.
The public is still paying off about $6 million in remaining debt from the mall’s demolition.
But according to Murray, who is also running for U.S Senate, former government staff in 2024 told him he could have that land for free. When the government later pushed back on that, Murray requested to have the land for $1 million.
He attributed the $1 million sale point to the deal that the Unified Government previously struck with Scavuzzo’s Foodservice Company, a developer that pitched a “KC Foodie Park” on the site that ultimately failed in the face of pandemic-era struggles.
The government and Eastside hit an impasse due to the $5 million sale price disagreement for several months.
But by Monday’s meeting, Eastside had significantly closed that gap with a $5.9 million offer to buy the land.
However, LaSala said, legal counsel were concerned that Eastside wanted to pay that sale price over five phases that started with a smaller amount of money at first that would gradually increase over time, beginning with $750,000 and working its way up to $1,750,000.
The Unified Government alternatively proposed five equal payments of $1.2 million.
The Unified Government has previously granted projects with similar funding scales as what Eastside is proposing, and so it should be allowed to do the same, Murray said.
Parties also disagreed over how they wanted to utilize various tax incentives, including tax increment financing and potentially Kansas sales tax and revenue (STAR) bonds.
But the sale of the land wasn’t the only sticking point, Murray said. He pointed to turnover among government staff involved in negotiations, and general dysfunction within the local government and its leadership, as factors that created delays. He thinks both factors have derailed other projects in eastern Wyandotte County, he said.
He hopes the county’s new administrator, who will follow the upcoming exit of County Administrator David Johnston, will be able to get the project, and others, back on track, he said.
Friction, potential litigation
The way the Unified Government’s legal team presented details about negotiations during Monday’s meeting, such as how they characterized missed meetings and how conversations between parties went down, was not accurate, Murray said. He went so far as to accuse LaSala of lying to the committee about those conversations.
He was also frustrated that residents did not get to speak during the meeting as he believed they should’ve been allowed to, Murray said.
The committee, led Monday evening by Eighth District Commissioner Andrew Davis, did not have a public comment portion for that agenda item, citing that it had already held a public comment session for the project during the June 1 meeting.
And, Davis later said, Murray during that June 1 meeting declined to present with his team and address the committee.
“Erik had the opportunity to present with his team, and he had the opportunity to provide public comment, and he sat there and said nothing,” Davis said, adding that it wasn’t fair for other businesses to have to wait for Murray to have a second public comment section for an item that was already commented on.
Eastside filed a formal complaint with the Unified Government about how the meeting was conducted, Murray said. And, he said, it’s possible litigation about government staff’s interference in his project could be forthcoming.
Murray also plans to soon release additional information, clarifying the details of information shared during Monday’s meeting, with the public.
How they voted
During Monday’s meeting, First District Commissioner Jermaine “Jae” Howard was the only member who motioned to try for another round of negotiations, pointing out how far Eastside had come toward their preferred sale price.
That motion failed and was followed by another by Fifth District Commissioner Carlos Pacheco, seconded by Davis, that a recommendation to revoke Eastside’s RFP be sent to the full board. That passed by a majority vote with Howard dissenting.
Davis, who represents the district where Midtown Station is proposed, said he’s going to continue to push to end the Unified Government’s relationship with Eastside.
After two years of conversations between negotiating parties, the plans haven’t resulted in anything tangible for the government to work with, he said, and that’s wasted taxpayer time and money.
Public officials are responsible to the people who elect them and their tax dollars, Davis said, adding that developers aren’t automatically guaranteed tax incentives. Rather, he said, developers must convince local officials they can pay for their proposals and guarantee they’ll be profitable for the community.
“Erik failed at that, and I think that’s why the committee landed where it’s at right now,” Davis said.
He’s not happy that another project might fall through at that site, which he said he wants to be successful. That said, the government has to engage in projects that are financially responsible, Davis said.
After the board makes its ultimate decision on Midtown Station, Davis wants to implement policies that create a firmer timeline for RFPs and how quickly parties need to reach a development agreement by.
Scope, history
Plans for Midtown Station include almost 2,000 apartments, retail space, a grocery store, town homes, a solar microgrid, a hotel, single family homes, greenhouses and more.
And if it comes together, a few business owners neighboring the development have previously said they hope it’ll bring housing people living in Midtown can really afford, and potentially benefit their own businesses.
It hasn’t been easy to find someone to put something where Indian Springs Mall, once a loved local entertainment spot that turned into a community eyesore, once stood.
After a handful of developers tried and failed to fill the property, the Unified Government solicited project proposals to build something new on it. In November 2025, they chose Murray’s project among a pool of three candidates.
