On August 4th, I stood before the Joplin City Council not to accuse, but to illuminate. Wearing yellow in symbolic honor of Missouri’s Sunshine Law, I brought with me not just a voice, but a packet of documentation and facts, all centered around the redevelopment of the Prospect Village site.
What We Know About the Site
International Paper Company & Contamination Legacy
The International Paper Company Superfund Site, located in Jasper County, Missouri, is a former industrial facility historically used for wood treatment and paper product manufacturing, which led to significant environmental contamination. The site is contaminated with a range of hazardous substances, including volatile organic compounds (VOCs), semi-volatile organic compounds (SVOCs), metals such as lead and arsenic, and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). According to the 2023 Missouri Department of Natural Resources (MoDNR) hazardous waste permit, the facility must undergo environmental monitoring and corrective action for a minimum of 30 years following closure, in line with federal hazardous waste management standards. The permit identifies multiple Solid Waste Management Units (SWMUs) and Areas of Concern (AOCs) that require long-term oversight. Several of these units have documented groundwater plumes, and the EPA has noted that the exact sources of contamination are difficult to pinpoint. The site relies heavily on institutional controls, such as land use restrictions, and ongoing groundwater monitoring, rather than full contaminant removal. Located within the heavily polluted Tri-State Mining District, the site presents cumulative environmental and health risks. Despite limited public transparency about remediation efforts, the permit legally binds the property owner to continued environmental responsibility for decades, potentially longer if contamination persists.
In 2001 and again in 2021, deed restrictions were placed on the property, limiting its use to industrial purposes and forbidding disturbance or removal of contaminated soil.
The original parcel of land once occupied by the International Paper Company has been divided into two sections. The portion that does not include the two known hazardous waste landforms was sold to Woodsonia Real Estate for redevelopment. This area is now being proposed for residential and mixed-use development, supported in part by public financing tools such as Tax Increment Financing (TIF).
The Prospect Village Redevelopment Project is a large-scale, mixed-use revitalization effort in Joplin, Missouri, designed to transform formerly industrial and underutilized land into a vibrant residential and recreational community. The project includes the construction of single-family homes, affordable housing units, and supporting infrastructure such as streets, sidewalks, and stormwater systems, with the goal of increasing local homeownership and improving neighborhood livability. In addition to housing, the redevelopment plan features a regional sports complex aimed at serving both local youth and traveling athletic teams. This complex is expected to include multi-use athletic fields, tournament-level facilities, and spectator amenities, positioning it as an economic driver for sports tourism in the region. The development spans multiple parcels and was formally designated as a blighted area, allowing the use of Tax Increment Financing (TIF) to support necessary site preparation and infrastructure investment. The long-term vision for Prospect Village includes a walkable community layout, access to public amenities, and integration with existing city services, contributing to Joplin’s broader strategic goals of environmental remediation, economic revitalization, and community development.
Despite the contamination history, the most hazardous portions of the site were excluded from the TIF boundary map.
Following the Money
Environmental Site Assessments (ESAs) are critical tools used to evaluate whether a piece of land is contaminated and to ensure it is safe for redevelopment. A Phase I ESA involves a thorough review of the property’s history, regulatory records, and a physical inspection to identify potential environmental concerns, without collecting soil or water samples. If any red flags are found, a Phase II ESA follows, which includes sampling and laboratory testing of soil, groundwater, or air to determine the presence and extent of contamination. These assessments are especially important for areas with industrial histories, like many parts of Jasper County, where pollutants such as lead, arsenic, petroleum compounds, or volatile organic compounds (VOCs) may be present. Conducting ESAs protects public health, helps avoid future legal and financial liability, and ensures that development is done safely and responsibly. They also support access to state and federal cleanup funding and build public trust by providing transparency and scientific evidence that a site is ready for reuse.
Over $1.9 million in remediation and $3.25 million in environmental services are being funded not by the developer, but by public tax mechanisms. The justification? Environmental cleanup costs.
The official “But-For Determination,” which argues that this public investment is necessary, explicitly cites the cost of a Phase II Environmental Site Assessment (ESA).
The Transparency Gap
The only environmental documentation currently held by the City for the redevelopment area is the blight study, a report used to justify the use of public financing through Tax Increment Financing (TIF). While a blight study may note general signs of neglect or underutilization, it is not an environmental assessment and does not include scientific testing of soil, groundwater, or air. In fact, the blight study for this site does not reference a Phase I or Phase II Environmental Site Assessment and instead cites limited soil testing from 2018, which may no longer reflect current conditions or updated EPA standards. This is insufficient for a site with a known history of industrial use and nearby hazardous waste designations, where contamination risks should be thoroughly evaluated using proper environmental assessments—not just visual observations or outdated reports.
When I requested access to the ESAs from the City, I was told they were not required. I was directed to the developer, who refused to release them.
Taxpayers are funding this cleanup, but the public has not been given access to the scientific assessments used to justify it.
A Moment at City Council
I delivered my findings to the council in person. I wore yellow to represent the Sunshine Law. I gave them documentation ahead of time. I made a clear, respectful ask:
“Please request the developer release the ESAs to the public.”
There were no objections. Just one question:
“Did you request this on your own or with a group?”
I answered that I am backed by the community
Then, silence.
This is now the second time my credibility has been questioned simply because I showed up as an individual. The first was in an email from a third-party representative of the developer, who dismissed my concerns by saying he didn’t know who I was. Then last night, during my address to city council, I was asked who I was “with”, as if being an informed citizen wasn’t enough. These moments reflect a deeper issue: the assumption that you must be backed by an organization to be taken seriously. But I’m here as a resident, a parent, and an environmental researcher who cares about this community. That should be enough.
What Needs to Happen Now
Short-Term: The City should formally request that the developer release the Phase I and Phase II ESAs.
Mid-Term: No further TIF or CID funding should be released until full environmental assessments are publicly reviewed.
Long-Term: Mandate environmental testing for all redevelopment on formerly contaminated lands and ensure public access to taxpayer-funded environmental data.
The Bottom Line
Positive development begins with informed communities. The soil beneath our feet holds our past and our future. We deserve to know what lies beneath it before we build homes, parks, or lives on top.
This is just the beginning.
Let’s keep showing up. Let’s keep asking questions. Let’s keep holding the light.