NEW TEXAS SUPREME COURT RULING AND LEGAL DEVELOPMENTS RAISE FURTHER QUESTIONS ABOUT MCKINNEY’S AIRPORT BOND PLAN

June 3, 2026

McKINNEY, TEXAS — Over the past several weeks, McKinney residents have been presented with a carefully crafted public relations campaign designed to reassure the community that the City’s airport expansion plans and related bond financing are both necessary and beneficial.

Most recently, City officials released a public Q&A document intended to address concerns surrounding the airport project and the proposed bond refinancing. Unfortunately, many important questions remain unanswered.

North Texas Conservation Association believes residents deserve the complete picture.

As always, we support our position with facts, court filings, and statements made by the Texas Attorney General.

THE CITY’S BOND VALIDATION CASE

The City of McKinney and the McKinney Community Development Corporation (MCDC) have filed a petition under Chapter 1205 of the Texas Government Code seeking judicial validation of approximately $30 million in 2026 Refunding Bonds.

The case is being heard in Travis County, approximately 200 miles from McKinney. Presiding Judge Aurora Martinez Jones ordered that the Texas Attorney General, along with all residents, property owners, ratepayers, and taxpayers of McKinney, appear in the proceeding. NTCA attorneys and representatives from the Texas Attorney General’s Office attended the hearing on behalf of McKinney residents who could not reasonably travel to Austin to participate.

The City seeks to replace bonds currently scheduled to mature in 2032 with bonds extending until 2056. In other words, the proposed refinancing extends taxpayer obligations by an additional 24 years.

A MAJOR TEXAS SUPREME COURT DECISION

A recent Texas Supreme Court ruling involving Austin’s Project Connect transit project has highlighted why this issue matters. Although the facts are different, both cases involve a similar legal question: whether the entity seeking to validate bonds qualifies as an “issuer” under Chapter 1205 of the Texas Government Code.

In the Project Connect case, the Texas Attorney General argued that the entity attempting to use the expedited Chapter 1205 process did not qualify under the statute and asked the court to dismiss the case for lack of jurisdiction.

Rather than ruling on that challenge, the trial court attempted to move the case toward trial.

The Texas Supreme Court intervened and ruled that courts must address jurisdictional challenges before proceeding.

The Supreme Court did not decide whether Project Connect should move forward. Instead, it made clear that courts cannot sidestep legitimate challenges to their jurisdiction and simply rush these cases to trial.

This ruling is significant because both the Texas Attorney General and NTCA have raised similar concerns in the McKinney airport bond case.

The Texas Attorney General has filed a Plea to the Jurisdiction arguing that MCDC does not meet the statutory definition of an issuer under Chapter 1205. NTCA has raised similar objections through its own filings.

If the court grants the Plea to the Jurisdiction, the City and MCDC may appeal. If the court denies the Plea to the Jurisdiction, the Attorney General may immediately appeal, which could stay proceedings in the trial court pending appellate review.

At a minimum, the Texas Supreme Court’s ruling confirms that these jurisdictional questions must be fully addressed before the case can move forward.

THE CITY SAYS THE REFINANCING WILL SAVE MONEY

One of the City’s primary arguments is that the refinancing will generate approximately $15 million in savings.

THE FACTS:

The Texas Attorney General has publicly challenged that claim.

In court filings, the Attorney General stated that “it is unclear how the refunding could accomplish this amount of savings.”

Residents should ask a simple question: If the savings are as significant as City officials claim, why is the Texas Attorney General questioning the math?

The proposed refinancing would also extend debt obligations from 2032 until 2056, creating more than $9 million in additional interest costs over the life of the bonds.

While City officials focus on projected savings, residents should understand that the proposal also comes with more than $9 million in additional borrowing costs associated with extending the debt for nearly a quarter century beyond its current maturity date.

The question is not simply whether a bond is refinanced.

The question is whether extending debt for another 24 years ultimately benefits McKinney taxpayers.

THE CITY SAYS THE CHAPTER 1205 PROCESS IS APPROPRIATE

The City has chosen to pursue bond validation through Chapter 1205, an expedited legal process available only to certain qualified entities.

THE FACTS:

The Texas Attorney General has challenged whether MCDC qualifies as an issuer under Chapter 1205. Specifically, the Attorney General argued that MCDC does not fall within the statutory definition required to utilize this expedited process.

This is not a minor technicality. It is one of the central legal questions now before the court. If MCDC does not qualify under Chapter 1205, then serious questions remain regarding whether this expedited bond validation process is available in the first place.

COLLIN COUNTY CASE CONTINUES TO ADVANCE

While much attention has focused on the Travis County proceedings, NTCA’s lawsuit filed in Collin County remains active.

Recently, the judge assigned to the Collin County case recused himself. No reason was provided, and a replacement judge has not yet been appointed.

While the City appears focused on the Travis County proceedings, the Collin County litigation remains very much alive and continues moving forward on behalf of McKinney residents.

WHO SHOULD PAY FOR THE AIRPORT?

NTCA’s position has remained consistent. Our Collin County lawsuit asserts that both the McKinney City Charter and Texas law require airport projects to be funded through revenues generated by the airport itself and related airport operations.

We continue to question whether taxpayer-funded sales tax revenues should be used to subsidize airport expansion projects that were intended to be self-supporting.

McKinney residents deserve a full and transparent discussion regarding who pays, who benefits, and who bears the long-term financial risks.

WHY THIS MATTERS

This issue has never been about being for or against aviation.

It has never been about being for or against economic development.

It is about transparency. It is about accountability. It is about ensuring that taxpayers understand exactly what financial obligations they are being asked to support.

It is about making sure that courts fully examine whether the City is using the proper legal process. And it is about ensuring that residents have a voice before decisions are made that could impact McKinney for generations.

The legal developments of the past week make one thing clear: important questions remain unresolved.

The Texas Attorney General is challenging the City’s legal authority to use the Chapter 1205 process.

The Texas Supreme Court has reinforced the importance of resolving those jurisdictional questions before moving forward.

The Collin County lawsuit continues to advance. And residents are still waiting for clear answers about costs, risks, and long-term taxpayer obligations.

NTCA will continue fighting for transparency, accountability, responsible government, and meaningful public participation.

We encourage all residents to stay informed, ask questions, attend public meetings, follow the legal proceedings, and make their voices heard.

The future of McKinney belongs to its residents. Thank you to every citizen who continues to stay engaged, seek the truth, participate in the process, and stand up for transparency and accountability in our community.

With Gratitude,

North Texas Conservation Association

Continue to stay up to date with us on Facebook and our Website.