Norman City Council Special Meeting: Capital Budget, TIF Ordinance, and Rock Creek District Discussion - May 5, 2026
Norman City Council Special Meeting: Capital Budget, TIF Ordinance, and Rock Creek District Discussion - May 5, 2026
The Norman City Council held a special meeting on Tuesday, May 5, 2026, at 5:00 PM to discuss four agenda items. The meeting focused on the Fiscal Year Ending (FYE) 2026 capital improvements budget and FYE 2028-2031 capital improvements plan, a proposed ordinance to establish a process for evaluating Tax Increment Financing (TIF) districts, and the status of the Rock Creek Entertainment District TIF project. The council also voted to enter executive session to discuss a pending tort claim.
Discussion Items
FYE 2026 Capital Improvements Program Budget and FYE 2028-2031 Capital Improvements Plan
- Budget Analyst Jacob Huckabee and Finance Director Clint Mercer presented the proposed capital budget. The Capital Sales Tax Fund projected revenues of $17,633,956 and expenditures of $17,524,617, leaving a surplus of approximately $109,000. Key allocations included $2.5 million for fleet and vehicles, $3.45 million for street maintenance, $500,000 for sidewalk projects, and $1 million for pay-as-you-go age maintenance. The budget also included appropriations from bond programs: $4.78 million for the 2026 Street Maintenance Bond, $2.73 million for the 2012 Transportation Bond, $1.5 million for the 2023 Bridge Maintenance Bond, and $8 million for the permanent shelter bond approved by voters. Staff noted that the projected available fund balance for new projects was negative $8.5 million, but this figure assumed all previously appropriated projects would be spent down to zero, not an actual deficit. Councilmember Dixon requested a clearer graphic to explain this number to the public. No vote was taken.
Proposed Ordinance for TIF District Application and Evaluation
- City Attorney Catherine Walker presented a proposed ordinance creating a uniform process for TIF applications. The six-month process includes an application (with a fee of 1% of project cost up to $10,000), staff economic and risk analysis, an ad hoc stakeholder committee, review by the Economic Development Advisory Board (EDAB), a statutory review committee, planning commission, and two public hearings before city council. The ordinance expresses a preference for ad valorem-only TIFs but allows sales tax increments. It requires a "but for" test to determine if development would occur without TIF assistance. Councilmembers debated the definition of "but for," concerns about property hoarding, impact on schools and city services (fire, police), and the level of risk for council members acting as trustees. Councilmember Kirby expressed concern that taxpayers are stressed and that TIFs could be abused. Councilmember Grant suggested the ad hoc committee should receive education on TIF structure. Councilmember Dixon noted that previous TIFs had splits benefiting schools. The council agreed to schedule a study session for further discussion before a first reading. No vote was taken.
Rock Creek Entertainment District and Associated TIF District
- Council discussed the legal status and possible paths forward for the Rock Creek Entertainment District TIF after a citizen petition seeking a vote was invalidated by the Oklahoma Supreme Court. City Attorney Rick Knight explained the risks of repeal, including potential breach of contract lawsuits against both the city and the public trust, and possible personal liability for council members as trustees. A proposed declaratory judgment action to ask a court whether the council can independently send the matter to a vote of the people was debated. Knight stated he could not ethically argue for a position he believes lacks legal merit, as he has publicly stated that the council does not have such authority. Councilmember Gansbury favored seeking a judicial answer. Councilmember Hinkle cautioned about negative impacts on the city's bond ratings if precedent is set for undoing previous council actions. Councilmember Grant expressed reluctance to sue a citizens' group. No action was taken, but staff were asked to provide written responses to outstanding legal questions.
Key Outcomes
- The council will continue discussing the TIF application ordinance at a study session before a first reading.
- Staff will provide written responses to legal questions raised about the Rock Creek TIF.
- The council voted unanimously to adjourn into executive session under Title 25, Section 307(D)(4) to discuss settlement of a pending tort claim filed by Stephanie Pizzerat.
Meeting Transcript
All right, everybody, it's five o'clock and pretty much everybody's here. So we'll go ahead and get started with the city council special meeting for Tuesday, May 5th, 2026. We have four items on the agenda. The first one is a discussion regarding the FYE 2026 capital improvements program budget and FYE 2028 through 2031 capital improvements plan. And we have city staff here to discuss that with us. Thank you, Marion Council. I'm name is Jacob Huckabee. I'm a budget analyst in the finance department. I joined with our finance director Clint Mercer to talk about the fiscal year ending 2026 and 27 capital improvements projects proposed budget. So basically just going over everything that you'll be considering for adoption when that comes to you in June for the adoption meeting. So first, just kind of talking about the book itself. So not every single city fund is going to be in the capital budget. As you can see here, the list mainly gonna be those that are not the general fund that have their own revenue sources for these capital projects. And there's also in the books some project requests out of the utility funds, but those are gonna have their own meeting on May 19th to go over those funds and the projects uh in more detail with utility staff as well. Um so just a brief overview of what the book looks like look like. It's a little bit different than the big budget book. Um so it starts off with an executive summary, just going over as you read through by fund what's in those funds, uh, the project appropriations, and then it gives an overview of the capital improvements plan, just talking about uh where we uh get a lot of these projects from, how the process works, why the book is structured the way it's structured, um, and then it gets into the funds and the project detail. So each of the tabs is gonna be for an individual fund. In those funds, you're gonna have your fund summary, which is just the overall how we get to those fund balances at the end of each year and projecting it out five years. Then you get into the project tables, which is gonna be a list of every active project in that fund, as well as the uh request in FYE 27, and then um some project schedules projecting out through FYE 28 and 31. Um, and then each of those requests in FYE 27. If you go through the book, are gonna have a project sheet, which uh it's gonna contain a description, gonna contain some more details on uh what those funds, if it's gonna be for design, construction, things like that in those projects. And then um it just ends off with the uh the glossary and some maps whenever that final budget is printed. Um starting off, we uh have the largest in the book. It's gonna be capital sales tax fund. Um so this is gonna be the sales tax portion. Um so this expenditure graph is gonna be based off of um we've talked about in a few of the previous meetings, the guidelines. These are the kind of main categories that we look at um where we want to put these sales tax funds, what are kind of the key areas that council has previously outlined as like high priorities for the capital sales tax. Um so as you can see, the highest one is gonna be the other projects and debt service at 32 percent. And there are some questions at the last meeting about whether or not there is any how much of that was debt service. And um right now in this um fiscal year, all that's gonna be in projects. Um we haven't had any debt service in the capital fund for a few years. Um, all the line items in the fund summary are just gonna be those expenditures for the projects and not paying off the debt service within the fund. That 32% right now is not any debt service. Yes, it is all projects, yes. We have a debt service fund and we pay for those. And when or at some point there probably will be some debt service. Um I think I might have asked if we could have that be a its own piece of that pie chart so council can see, if the public can see, everybody can see. Uh, whenever there is debt service, exactly how much we think that you did you mention that might have been there might have been some complication exactly parsing it out. I'm not sure. We have a debt service fund that the the governmental debts paid out of. Sometimes we have some smaller things like um we had some lease stuff, uh, we had some uh um some other small items that that came out of here, but that we haven't had that in a while. So perfect. Okay. And then the next largest one is gonna be the capital outlay or the capital equipment, and then street maintenance at 21%. So everything is pretty close to where the guidelines within one percent um where we want to be. I think the main difference is gonna be in information technology, those are the where we set aside the amount for the the software and hardware infrastructure updates, some of those big costs. Um that's a little bit higher this year because we did uh include, as we'll talk about later, the uh radio maintenance contract for the city's radio system and IT in that. So that's that looks a little bit off compared to the guidelines, but um everything else is pretty much right where we want it to be. And so in total, the projected capital sales tax revenue is 17,633,956, and the proposed capital sales tax expenditures are 17,524,617.
openpublica.com