A North Texas conservation group is trying to put the brakes on McKinney National Airport’s expansion – and they’re doing it in court.
The North Texas Conservation Association (NTCA), joined by four individual plaintiffs — Paul Chabot, Ben Brown, Tom Michero, and Jack DeSimone — filed a petition in Collin County seeking to block roughly $30 million in bonds tied to the airport project.
Named as defendants are the McKinney Community Development Corporation and several city officials, including Mayor Bill Cox, Mayor Pro Tem Gere Feltus, and City Manager Paul Grimes – each sued in their official capacity.
The group alleges that the bond financing structure violates both state law and the City of McKinney charter.
Fight Over Sales Tax vs. Airport Revenue
The legal fight comes down to a fairly specific question: Where does the money backing these bonds actually come from?
The MCDC 2026 Bonds are structured as “refunding bonds” — meaning they’re designed to pay off bonds the city already issued in 2025. The plaintiffs say the problem is how those bonds are being secured. Rather than being backed by revenue the airport itself would generate, the bonds are tied to the MCDC’s share of McKinney’s sales tax collections. This, the plaintiffs argue, runs afoul of Texas Local Government Code Section 501.208(a), which requires that bond principal and interest be secured by revenue derived from the actual project being financed.
Simply put, the law requires that airport bonds stand on the airport’s own two feet financially. The plaintiffs say the city is instead leaning on taxpayer sales dollars to prop them up.
“The bonds say what they say, and the statute says what it says,” Steven Ross, attorney for NTCA, told The Dallas Express. “I think that’s why you’re not hearing the city say much, because this is a pretty straightforward case. It’s black and white.”
The petition also alleges violations of the McKinney City Charter and MCDC’s own bylaws.
Governmental Immunity: City Seeks Dismissal of Officials from Suit
Defendants, represented by Norton Rose Fulbright, filed their Original Answer on April 17, 2026, disputing the plaintiffs’ reading of the law.
The city argues that MCDC operates under both Chapter 501 and Chapter 505 of the Texas Local Government Code, and that Chapter 505 explicitly controls when a conflict arises between the two. Under Section 505.302, the city argues, sales tax proceeds may indeed be used to pay principal and interest on bonds issued by a Type B development corporation — the category under which MCDC is organized.
Defendants also point to language in the bonds themselves stating they “may not be paid in whole or in part from any property taxes raised or to be raised by the City and is not a debt of and does not give rise to a claim for payment against the City” — language they argue defeats the plaintiffs’ charter argument.
The city has also filed special exceptions, saying the petition doesn’t clearly specify any actions by City Manager Grimes or MCDC President Cindy Schneible. It also asked the court to dismiss the claims against those officials on the basis of “governmental immunity.”
McKinney city officials, including Mayor Bill Cox and City Manager Paul Grimes, did not provide substantive responses to questions from The Dallas Express, citing ongoing litigation.
Voters Rejected Airport Twice — But City Claims It Was Only About the Bonds
The lawsuit comes after what plaintiffs describe as two voter rejections of airport-related bond measures in 2015 and 2023. The city has argued, according to the defendants’ filing, that those elections concerned debt issuance rather than the airport’s future development.
Ross pushed back on that interpretation.
“I think that is a sort of an after-the-fact recharacterization by the city,” Ross told The Dallas Express, recounting that campaign signage during the 2023 election focused squarely on the airport itself — not the technical mechanics of bond financing. “The signs were, vote for the airport or don’t vote for the airport. That’s what everybody had in their mind.”
Ross, who moved to McKinney from Dallas during the 2023 campaign, said he and his wife relocated in part because they believed voters had rejected the airport expansion. “We thought, okay, great,” Ross said. “I’m glad they rejected the airport.”
He added that the city could easily have cleared up any confusion. “They could have held a referendum afterwards and said, ‘Hey, are you in favor of developing McKinney airport for commercial service?’ They could have done that… but they didn’t, and I think they didn’t want to know the answer.”
“It’s Really Both”: Lawsuit Aims to Halt Bonds and Slow McKinney Airport Expansion
The petition seeks “declaratory relief” along with temporary and permanent injunctions to stop the bond issuance. Beyond the legal issues, Ross said the case also carries quality-of-life significance for residents, especially those in Heritage Ranch, a Fairview community located about three-quarters to one mile south of the airport runway.
“These commercial jets that are going to be taking off from McKinney airport are going to fly directly over Heritage Ranch, and that’s going to cause a lot of noise pollution, a lot of diminishment of property values,” Ross told The Dallas Express. “People in Heritage Ranch — they never got a chance to vote on this.”
When asked whether the lawsuit targets only the bond issuance or the broader airport expansion, Ross was direct. “It’s really both,” he explained. “Slowing down the airport is maybe the biggest priority, but we think it’s just really improper… for a city council to ignore the will of the voters like that.”
NTCA Lawsuit Triggers Attorney General Review of Airport Financing
Ross told The Dallas Express that when he filed the lawsuit, he contacted the Texas Attorney General’s office and was told the bond package had not yet been received. He said it is the AG’s policy not to approve bonds while litigation challenging their validity is pending.
“They told me there are two things — when the bond package comes in, the issuer has to certify that there is no litigation pending that challenges the validity of the bonds,” Ross said. “They cannot certify that now with our lawsuit pending.”
Ross also indicated NTCA is separately reviewing the previously issued 2025 bonds — totaling more than $90 million when combined with bonds issued by the McKinney Economic Development Corporation — for potential additional challenges.
NTCA, in a press release published on April 27 and shared with The Dallas Express, pointed to the recent groundbreaking at North Texas Regional Airport as an example of what the group described as “responsible, well-planned airport expansion,” contrasting it with what the organization characterized as unresolved environmental, infrastructure, and financial transparency concerns in McKinney.
