Nate Ellis of Public Finance Law Group presented a proposed tax increment financing (TIF) district and project plan for the Chickasha Airport Industrial Park, telling the City Council the plan would capture incremental ad valorem tax and construction sales tax — and would qualify for state Leverage Act matching — to fund infrastructure and site development. He said the project identifies $93,100,000 in authorized project costs and an estimated $97 million in projected TIF ad valorem revenue tied to some $500 million in projected capital investment.

The proposal would capture 100% of the ad valorem tax increment and construction-related sales tax; under the project plan, Ellis said 75% of increment would be designated for project costs and 25% would flow back to taxing jurisdictions. Ellis said the city could include sales tax from construction to access state matching funds and that the increment fund would not be part of the city’s general fund and could be spent only for project-plan costs. He said some of the project-area boundaries are broad by design to allow placement of water and sewer mains where needed and to allow future incremental-area activations within 10 years.

Why it matters: the TIF is intended to overcome infrastructure barriers that may otherwise prevent development on and around the municipal airport — runway, taxiway and utility upgrades were listed as potential needs — and could leverage state matching dollars. If adopted, the city would use captured increment for public infrastructure and can later enter reimbursement agreements with private developers for developer-built infrastructure.

Council and public members pressed for specifics. Members asked how much existing ad valorem is being generated in the area (Ellis estimated annual base taxes low, roughly in the low tens of thousands), why the project-area (red) box includes properties outside city ownership, and what the $10 million airport ‘security and facility improvements’ line represents. Ellis and city staff clarified that the $10 million was a placeholder for airfield and vehicular access improvements, potential runway or taxiway strengthening and some perimeter fencing or gating; staff said detailed project agreements and any debt issuance would return to council for approval.

Residents questioned notice to property owners inside the red project-area box; Ellis said state statute requires publication in a newspaper and the city published the required notices and that private-property improvements would require owner consent. The council also discussed potential privacy concerns related to security technology; staff said any specific surveillance or camera installations would come back to council separately and would be disclosed publicly.

Next steps: the council held the first of two public hearings and Ellis said a second hearing and potential ordinance consideration are scheduled for Jan. 20, 2026. No ordinance was adopted at the meeting; the proposal remains under public review.

All names, votes and procedural steps in this account are drawn from the council’s meeting record and the public presentation.