Camp Verde asks Sedona to support HB 4064 for economic development

The Sedona City Council heard its most recent legislative update on Feb. 24 from city lobbyist Kathy Senseman and Deputy City Manager Lauren Browne.

House Bill 2290

HB 2290 introduced by Rep. Justin Olson [R-District 10] would reshape how revenue from Arizona’s version of sales tax — Transaction Privilege Tax — is distributed to Arizona municipalities. Under Arizona’s current destination-based system, when a product is delivered to a customer, the sales tax goes to the jurisdiction where the delivery is made — meaning if a Sedona resident orders something online and it arrives at their door, Sedona gets the tax revenue.

This bill would flip that formula. Instead of the delivery destination determining who gets the money, the tax would go to the jurisdiction where the warehouse or distribution center is located. So if an online distributor warehouse sits in Tucson, the city of Tucson collects the sales tax — regard­less of where the package is delivered.

For communities that don’t have large warehouses, the change would be a significant loss of online sales tax revenue.

Browne said the town of Clarkdale asked Sedona to send a letter of opposition on HB 2290, which she did on Feb. 10. Clarkdale Mayor Robyn Prud’homme-Bauer filed her opposition on Feb. 16. Representatives from Cottonwood, Flagstaff, Phoenix, Prescott and the League of Arizona Cities & Towns have also filed against.

Proponents of HB 2290 include the Arizona Chamber of Commerce, the National Federation of Independent Business and the Arizona Tax Research Association.

House Bill 4064

The Town of Camp Verde worked with its bond attorney at Stifel to draft the language for HB 4064, sponsored by Rep. Selina Bliss [R-District 1], aiming for changes to Municipal Improvement Districts and is seeking Sedona’s support. Council will discuss it further at their next meeting.

“In 2016, there were some statutory changes made that created some uninten­tional barriers on Municipal Improvement Districts,” Camp Verde Town Manager Miranda Fisher said. “The way the current legislation reads now, you start to do all the engineering and the design costs and then you go out and do a petition process to see if 50% of the voters support it.”

Fisher said the bill would move the petition earlier, before a municipality spends money on design and would allow local government to get a better feedback.

“It doesn’t take away the objection process,” Fisher said. “So there’s still a public hearing on the later end, where even if you said yes at the [start] you can still express concern on the back end.”

The Town of Camp Verde and the Yavapai-Apache Nation are working to secure $18 million to $20 million in funding for the Northbound Highway 260 Sewer Expansion — a project driven in large part by land the Nation acquired on Nov. 4, 2024, through a 3,201-acre land exchange with the U.S. Forest Service. The Lower 260 Parcel, which begins near W. Horseshoe Bend Drive and runs south along State Route 260 to Interstate 17 is the largest tract the Nation gained in that exchange.

Current supporters include Yavapai County Supervisor Nikki Check [D-District 3] who repre­sents Sedona and Supervisor Dee Jenkins [R-District 2]. There are currently no regis­tered neutral or opposition positions.

House Bill 4030

Senseman said House Bill 4030, introduced by Olson], has drawn scorn from municipal lobby­ists and would prohibit, “a municipality and a county from adopting, imposing or collecting increased fees, transaction privilege tax and utility rates,” according to the House summary, unless 60% of voters approved the increase starting in July. If passed, it would be in effect for the next four years.

HB 4030 “is such a horrible bill,” Senseman said. “I can’t talk to a single municipal lobbyist down there without talking about 4030.”

House Bill 2793

The bill would reduce public notice requirements. If a single property owner wants to have a munici­pality annex their property and owns 100% of what’s being annexed, cities could choose to publish annexa­tion notices online in lieu of publishing in newspapers of record, posting signs and mailing notices, as currently required.

“You all voted to oppose this bill based on your value of transparency,” Browne said. “With some new information provided from the city of Buckeye and the League of [Arizona] Cities & Towns, they would like to see if we would consider moving our posi­tion to neutral in the spirit of working together. The reason for this is they worked closely with the Arizona Media Association and the league on the language in the bill, and we are the only city that doesn’t support the bill, which isn’t ideal for their effort.”

With Councilwoman Kathy Kinsella opposed and Vice Mayor Brian Fultz and Councilwoman Melissa Dunn absent, council voted 4-1 on two motions to recon­sider and then update its opposition to Rep. Michael Carbone’s [R-District 25] House Bill 2793 to neutral.

“There needs to be a requirement on municipali­ties to notice their residents … and this reduces that requirement,” Kinsella said. “It’s just allowing the state to codify a lesser level of government transparency.”

Councilman Derek Pfaff called for a future agenda item that was accepted to codify the city’s notice standards as a city ordi­nance and require public notification. “Regardless of whatever minimum state law allows, we’re going to hold ourselves to a higher standard.”