McAlester holds first public hearing on proposed George Mount Expressway TIF district; no vote taken

The McAlester City Council opened a public hearing Tuesday on a proposed tax increment financing (TIF) district along the George Mount Expressway corridor to support a mixed retail and housing development; no vote was taken.

The proposal as presented calls for a development that would place a large national sporting goods retailer on an 8-acre site fronting the expressway, three quick-service restaurants on the frontage, and about 28 housing units on 14 acres behind those commercial parcels. Curtis Woods, the developer, said the broader project would ultimately include walking trails and additional community connections but that the present TIF plan covers the first phase.

The TIF committee, chaired by former Mayor John Brown, unanimously recommended the project plan to the council. Brown summarized the recommended incentive structure and timeline, saying the package is similar to a previous local project and “this is $10,000,000 or, I believe, 9 years, whichever comes first” and that the overall project is “just over $48,000,000,” as stated to council.

Why it matters: the proposal would use a mix of sales tax and ad valorem (property) increment to reimburse the developer for eligible public investments, shifting the timing of project funding toward future incremental tax receipts rather than up-front city expenditures. Several residents raised concerns that the plan, as presented, could substantially increase traffic and strain nearby services and school capacity.

Key details presented to council - Incentives and term: The TIF would reimburse the developer from both sales tax and ad valorem increments. The committee described a structure capped at roughly $10 million and a nine-year limit "whichever comes first," and indicated an allocation that tracks previous local practice: 90% of the increment to the developer and 10% retained by the city. - Start dates and revenue triggers: Staff and the developer said sales-tax sharing would begin with the first retail sale at the large retailer; ad valorem increment would be set by the assessor after the TIF is approved and the assessor establishes the baseline (staff said assessment baseline work would occur about 90 days after TIF approval, giving a practical ad valorem start of about July 1 in the example used). - Payments: Woods said the city would not provide upfront cash; reimbursements would be paid as the increment is earned (the developer indicated payments are generally annual). - Schools: The plan includes a 2.5% set-aside of the increment to help Frank School District address capacity (committee/ staff described this as intended to fund temporary classroom capacity such as portable classrooms). Council and members of the public discussed how McAlester Public Schools would be affected; staff said ad valorem increment as structured would not flow to McAlester Public Schools and that Frank’s portion was intended to address immediate capacity. - Zoning and planning: The presenter said zoning and planning bodies had already approved the project plan unanimously.

Public concerns and developer responses Residents who live off Tanglewood and in nearby subdivisions raised multiple concerns during public comment: density of 28 units on 14 acres, traffic increases on narrow local roads (Tanglewood, Crooked Oak), safety and speeding, stormwater and drainage, water supply and septic connections, and emergency services access. Several speakers described current road and drainage problems in the same area and asked whether the development or developer would fund street improvements.

Curtis Woods and staff responded that the developer would build streets and utilities to city standards if the city accepted them; that the TIF does not create direct city upfront debt or bonds; and that if the housing portion does not produce the anticipated ad valorem increment (for example, if units are not built or sold), the city has no obligation to pay from its general fund—the risk, they said, rests with the developer.

Density, timing and flexibility Speakers from the neighborhood asked whether the plan must include 28 units. Woods and committee members said the housing mix is flexible in later design phases but that altering the plan now would require restarting elements of the TIF process, which could jeopardize signed commitments by the retailer and restaurants. Staff said if the council approves the plan as presented, future changes could be proposed later as an amendment to the plan that would require committee review and a council decision.

Next steps Council members and staff said this is the first of two required public hearings under state law (citing 62 O.S. § 8.59(b)(3) as the governing statute for public notice and hearings). The council opened the hearing by motion (mover: Vice Mayor Beatty; second: Councilor Gilmore) and closed the hearing later by motion (mover: Councilor Roden; second: Councilor Boatwright). Staff said they would take the public comments, refine the plan and return with a potentially final plan in two weeks at the same time and channel for a second public hearing; no formal vote on adopting the project plan or creating the TIF district occurred at this meeting.

Quotes "This is your chance to ask questions about the project. We can make changes as we go," Vice Mayor Beatty said when opening the hearing. "The sales tax portion starts with the first sale at the large retailer. The ad valorem will start whenever the assessor has set the baseline... 90 days from when the TIF is passed," John Brown said during public Q&A.

Ending/Outlook The council did not take action to create the TIF district at the meeting. Staff and the developer will return with revisions reflecting public input and council direction at a second public hearing scheduled in two weeks; residents and councilors asked staff to address traffic flows, density, school impacts and utility/street construction responsibilities in the revised plan.