Today’s Airport

McKinney National Airport is today a financially self-sustaining local asset with an annual operating budget of $12M. The Airport has an annual economic impact of $212.7M to the area and generates $3.5 million in Ad Valorem revenue.

The Cost of the Airport Expansion is $300 Million

Breakdown of the Airport Expansion Costs

Project - Add New Commercial Passenger TerminalEstimated Cost
Terminal Gates (4 Gate Facility$173,500,000
East Side Infrastructure Development (e.g., water, electrical,sewer)$3,700,000
Terminal Apron I Pavement (4 gates and surrounding areas)$19,000,000
Parallel Taxiway C - Partial Taxiway to Runway 36 End$15,500,000
Terminal Entrance and Loop Roadway$35,700,000
Passenger Vehicle Parking (Surface Lots)$46,700,000
Vehicle Service Road Serving East Side of Airport$7,500,000
New AARF Equipment (Aircraft Rescue and Firefighting$1,000,000

How Will We Pay For The Airport Expansion

The City of McKinney Will NOT Raise Or Issue New Taxes To Fund The Airport Expansion

Source Amount Comment
General Obligation Bond $200,000,000 A "Yes" vote on May 6 only authorizes the city to issue the bonds. Bond money is restricted legally to only being spent on the Airport Expansion
McKinney Community Development Corporation $50,000,000 $50,000,000 has been requested from the MCDC
McKinney Economic Development Corporation $50,000,000 $50,000,000 has been requested from the MEDC
FAA and State of Texas $125,000,000 It is anticipated that the city will be eligible for state and federal reimbursements of up to $125M

Interesting Facts About the Costs and Financing of the Airport Expansion

Collin Country and the City of McKinney have issued approximately $1.6 Billion in Bonds over the last 10 years. Each of those bonds were for needed Capital Improvements. Interestingly, none of those Capital Improvements brought any sort of revenue to the City or County. The Airport Bond being proposed will generate an immense economic impact to this region with the City of McKinney receiving the highest proportion. Additionally, there will be real revenue going into the city’s coffers from the airport’s operations. These are funds that can be allocated to improve city services, education, roads, infrastrure, etc. Plus, Ad Volerem taxes





The consultants have modeled many different financial streams regarding the airport passenger service terminal expansion.  In conservative models, they have shown the possibility of nearly $80M in losses over the next 25 years. This possible $80M loss is being touted by opposition to dissuade the expansion, yet the City has acknowledged this potential loss and continues to move forward…why?  Well, first and foremost, the economic impact to the region over that same period of time is estimated to be nearly $27 Billion Dollars with McKinney being the benefactor of a large portion of that (kinda that spend a nickel to make a dollar adage). Enhanced sales tax dollars alone, over that same period of time,  will be staggering and could subsidize such a loss. Additionally, it is also important to understand some of the overly conservative assumptions that generate the possible loss, and the impact to those projections when those assumptions change.  For example, the conservative projections assume an entire, independent police force and fire department on the airport grounds.  This assumption was used by the consultant as it is a common occurrence where the airport is too large, or too remote, from life safety services.  That is NOT the case at McKinney National Airport.  The reality is that Fire Station 4 and our current Police Department, with added personnel, will be used for airport services.  This alone cuts a possible loss from $80M to $40M.  The assumptions used concerning eligible grants from the FAA and State are approximately 1/2 what the airport will be eligible for. Receiving 75% of the eligible grants reduce the loss by another $20M.  If the higher projections of number of passengers is realized, the loss becomes a profit of nearly $40M.  The point is, there is much more to the discussion than a single, conservative projection snapshot.

Scroll to Top