Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Economic Development Opportunity Zones topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Supervisors review Opportunity Zones mapping, defer final tract nominations until staff provides more data
Summary
After an overview of revised Opportunity Zones eligibility and maps, county staff said Flagstaff and Sedona recommended three tracts; supervisors asked for population and economic impact data and directed staff to return before the June 1 ACA submission deadline.
The Coconino County Board of Supervisors received an overview May 19 of the federal Opportunity Zones program and tentative local recommendations from Flagstaff and Sedona, then directed staff to return with more information before the county nominates two census tracts to the Arizona Commerce Authority.
Economic Development Director John Saltonstall told the board the Opportunity Zones 2 rules and Treasury guidance assign eligibility using American Community Survey data and that state governors will nominate a limited share of eligible tracts. Saltonstall said the current federal map leaves large swaths of Coconino County ineligible and showed that Flagstaff and Sedona have recommended two Flagstaff tracts (industrial/NAU corridor areas) and a Sedona tract for the governor’s consideration.
Saltonstall said the designation window extends through 2028 and that investors in qualified opportunity funds may receive deferral and step‑up benefits depending on how long investments are held. He warned the board the program tends to attract projects in areas that are already ready for development (water, sewer, entitlement) and that rural tracts may be less likely to draw investors.
Several supervisors urged the county to advocate for rural inclusion. “We’re rural counties…we are missing the communities that absolutely need this,” Supervisor Fowler said, arguing the map’s census boundaries can mask pockets of distress in outlying communities such as Fredonia and Marble Canyon. Board members asked staff for tract‑level population and economic impact figures and for the letters and justifications Flagstaff and Sedona submitted.
Staff said the Arizona Commerce Authority asked for a recommended list around June 1 and that the county can provide justification for whichever two tracts it nominates; staff pledged to circulate the cities’ recommendations and a briefing on Treasury/ACA criteria so the board can take a formal vote at a subsequent meeting.
No final tract nominations were made at the meeting; the item will return when the board has had a chance to review the requested data.
