Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Bond Package topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

City Manager pitches $415 million bond package; council to review Dec. 16

Broken Arrow City Council · December 3, 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

City Manager Michael Spurgeon presented a $415 million, seven‑proposition bond package (plus an eighth sales‑tax proposition) to fund streets, public safety, parks, stormwater and a library partnership, and asked the council to receive the presentation and lay the proposal over for final consideration Dec. 16.

City Manager Michael Spurgeon on Wednesday presented the administration's recommended 2026 “Build Our Future BA” bond package and asked the City Council to receive the presentation, give staff time to incorporate feedback and return a shorter summary for action at the Dec. 16 meeting.

Spurgeon said the recommended package totals $415,000,000 and is organized into seven property‑tax propositions that would not increase the current property tax rate and an eighth proposition that would be a temporary half‑cent sales tax for sports facilities. “There will be no change in the current property tax rate, which means these will not be any new taxes,” Spurgeon told the council.

The largest share of the package — roughly 49.6% — is proposed for transportation projects, including a list of named road and intersection improvements such as Tucson/Aspen/Olive, Omaha Street, New Orleans Street and several intersection upgrades. Charlie Bright, director of engineering construction, said the transportation proposition includes both legally named projects and unnamed “pots” of money for residential street rehabilitation, federal grant matching and contingencies.

Public safety is the second major component. Staff recommended about $56 million for police, fire and training‑center improvements, including replacement apparatus and support for a future Fire Station 9. In parks and recreation, staff highlighted a proposed Elam Park community center (partially named at $30 million, with additional unnamed funding in the package), splash pads, pickleball courts and playground upgrades.

Two stormwater propositions were described separately because state law allows measures that may authorize public work on private property; those propositions would require a 60% voter approval if they include statutory language that permits work that affects private parcels. Spurgeon and staff stressed that any work on private land would require the property owner’s permission.

Proposition 7 would provide a $4 million city contribution to a Tulsa City‑County Library partnership to build a new South Broken Arrow library; the library's executive director said the total project is roughly $12–13 million. Proposition 8 would be a dedicated, temporary half‑cent sales tax for sports facilities with a five‑year sunset; staff estimate a half‑cent currently generates about $10,600,000 annually and projected net proceeds of roughly $50–56 million over five years, depending on growth.

Spurgeon noted extensive public outreach and a citizens’ advisory process that reduced an initial $1.2 billion list of projects to the current package. He also presented a schedule and recommended that council allow staff to finalize the documents needed to place related ordinances and a resolution on a January 6 docket if the council decides to proceed toward an April 7 election.

Council members asked procedural and substantive questions about project naming, escalation assumptions and how the sports tax would be communicated to voters. On the question of public support, Spurgeon said a staff survey of 3,400 respondents (88% registered voters) showed 68% support for the sports proposal, and cautioned that survey support below about 60% would be a concern for passage.

The council did not vote on the bond package. Instead, members agreed to take the presentation under advisement, publish the materials for public review and return to a shorter summary at the Dec. 16 meeting so that the council can decide whether to direct staff and legal to prepare ordinances and a resolution that, if approved in January, would place propositions on the April 7 ballot.