Focus on revenue-generating areasDuring last week’s strategy session, the Oro Valley Town Council discussed annexation, framing it as one of the town’s tools to address long-term revenue challenges. Council members repeatedly described annexation as a way to expand the sales tax base without adding new taxes or increasing existing taxes on existing residents.
Balancing revenue with service costs
Council members emphasized that annexation decisions must account for the costs of providing municipal services. Public safety, road maintenance, and infrastructure responsibilities would expand with annexation and must be evaluated alongside potential revenues. Staff noted that departments such as police, public works, and water would need to assess service demands to ensure annexations do not create na situation in which the one-time and continuing cost of the annexation exceed the revenue benefit.
Define specific targets... Clear strategies
Several council members expressed concern that Oro Valley’s annexation strategy has lacked clarity and follow-through. While annexation areas have been discussed for years, council members said they have not consistently been provided with detailed maps, defined boundaries, cost estimates, or clear action steps. The council signaled interest in narrowing its focus to specific high-impact areas and pursuing those annexations more deliberately. [See panel right for areas mentioned at the meeting]
Overcome hurdles: Property owner consent remains a major hurdle
The discussion highlighted two limitations of annexation, On is that property owners must agree to it. Council members noted that many properties under consideration are owned by out-of-state investors who evaluate annexation strictly based on financial return. Several questioned how Oro Valley can make annexation attractive when those owners already receive basic services and may see little financial advantage in changing jurisdictions.
Overcome hurdles: Legal limits on annexation incentives
Council and staff identified a second limitation. The Arizona’s constitutional “gift clause”. Under state law, the town cannot offer financial incentives, tax relief, or other benefits to private property owners unless Oro Valley receives clear and measurable value in return. Future tax revenue alone does not meet this legal standard. As a result, annexation incentives are largely limited to infrastructure-related investments, such as improvements to roads. The barrier: In already developed commercial areas where little new infrastructure is needed, the town has few lawful tools to encourage annexation, even when potential revenue benefits are clear.
More discussion to come on this at the March strategy session
Council directed staff to return with more detailed information at the council’s second strategy session on March 2, including defined annexation boundaries, estimated revenues, service costs, and legal constraints. The discussion made clear that the council views annexation as a potential response to future fiscal challenges, but one that will require sharper focus, clearer strategy, and realistic expectations to move forward.





