Norman staff outlines options for parking authority trust to finance garages and parking management
Loading...
Summary
City staff presented a plan to create a public parking authority trust that could issue revenue bonds, manage parking and potentially include transit. Council members expressed support but asked staff to return with financing scenarios and a study session; no formal action was taken.
City staff described options Thursday for creating a public parking authority trust that could plan, develop and operate parking structures and other parking services in Norman and could be structured to include transit operations.
The proposal, presented to the City of Norman Finance Committee, would create a trust entity separate from the city to hold title, issue debt and operate parking facilities while keeping city general‑fund liabilities separate. Staff said a trust indenture (the trust’s charter) would be adopted by council resolution and the city would be the beneficiary of the trust in the draft presented.
The trust model would allow the authority to issue long‑term revenue bonds and exercise powers such as property sales and eminent domain within the scope of the trust’s purpose. Staff noted constitutional and local voting requirements: beneficiary approval of certain debt actions would require two‑thirds of council votes, and waiving competitive bidding to issue negotiated debt would require a three‑quarters vote (seven votes in the council’s model). Staff also urged trustees to remember they would have distinct fiduciary duties when acting in trustee capacity for an authority.
Staff provided local revenue context and preliminary budget figures. Parking‑related revenues included roughly $3,364,600 budgeted in FYE26 from parking lot leases, meter revenue and enforcement; current parking and transit operations are being combined in budget accounting but some enforcement revenues are not yet allocated to that combined fund. Staff estimated parking‑related expenses at about $424,000 annually (including pay station equipment replacement, roughly $80,000 in maintenance and about $267,000 in enforcement salaries and benefits). If transit were included, dedicated public safety sales tax revenues (an eighth‑cent sales tax dedicated to transit) and Federal Transit Administration (FTA) grants would be part of the trust accounting but remain subject to restrictions attached to those revenues.
Staff discussed governance options and regional examples. The Central Oklahoma Transportation and Parking Authority (COPTA) in Oklahoma City operates as a separate authority that can be written to allow regional activity but is currently governed and benefitted by Oklahoma City; Tulsa’s authority is structured differently and operates only off‑street garages and lots, with on‑street meters retained by the city. Staff said those models informed options such as making the city council the trustees or appointing a separate trusteeship.
Council members asked about financing mechanics and risk mitigation. Staff said revenue bonds for a new garage would likely require creative structuring — for example, interest‑only payments or capitalized interest during an initial ramp period — because the garage’s operating revenues would need time to mature. Staff recommended pursuing long‑term leases with developers and private users to provide guaranteed revenue that could support bond financing, while noting preleases typically do not start paying until facilities exist. Private developers or preleases could reduce bank risk when borrowing for construction, but staff warned that a garage would still require upfront borrowing and that structured capital planning would be required.
Council members discussed likely demand and potential sites. Staff cited previous parking studies (2003; updated by Jacobs Engineering in 2015–2016; a county study in 2017) and recent local demand: staff said a 1,000‑space garage could lease all spaces at current demand levels. Initial sites discussed included areas near Aspen, Peters and Gray and Campus Corner; a council member also raised the Young Family Athletic Center as a potential third site. Staff said they would meet with adjacent property owners to verify long‑term lease interest at identified sites.
Staff recommended next steps: finalize a draft indenture, coordinate with private parking financiers (staff has spoken with parking‑structure firm David Floyd and associates), produce financing concepts, and return to council for a study session followed by a resolution to adopt the trust if council directs. No formal motion or vote was taken during the meeting.
