Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Development topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Developers say 1,300‑acre Flying Fortress Parkway project moving forward after partner exit

5970939 · October 7, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

A development team announced at Kingman’s Oct. 7 council meeting that a previously stalled 1,300‑acre project along Flying Fortress Parkway is moving forward; the team said a former partner is no longer involved and settlement matters are complete.

Kathy Tackett Hicks, speaking during the Oct. 7 call to the public, announced that a development team led by William Police and associated entities is moving forward on a 1,300‑acre development along Flying Fortress Parkway.

Tackett Hicks read a prepared statement on behalf of the project team saying the project “is moving forward with renewed focus,” adding that a former partner, identified only as Mr. Leonard, “is no longer involved in our project in any capacity” and that “with the settlement complete, we are committed to bringing this project back to life.” She described anticipated benefits including job creation and economic strengthening and said she will rejoin the project team to assist with finalizing plan approvals and zoning amendments.

Why it matters: A 1,300‑acre development adjacent to Flying Fortress Parkway could materially affect land use, infrastructure demands and future economic activity in Kingman; the announcement signals renewed developer intent but does not itself constitute a city approval.

Council response: The announcement was made during the public-comment portion of the meeting; no council action or endorsement was recorded in response to the statement. Staff and councilors previously discussed airport-area land and state land options earlier in the agenda but did not tie this public comment to any specific regulatory or budgetary action Oct. 7.

Clarifying note: The public statement named the project size and parties on behalf of the developer team; the council did not present details of binding agreements, and any land‑use or zoning approvals would require subsequent applications and formal council action.