SB 1787 — exactions; individualized determinations; appeal

BillSenate Number:Engrossed exactions;

S.B.individualized determinations;

appeal State of Arizona Senate Fifty-seventh Legislature Second Regular Session SENATE BILL 1787 PetersenAN FloorACT AmendmentAMENDING ReferenceTITLE to:9, CHAPTER 4, ARTICLE 6.2, ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES, BY ADDING SECTION 9-463.07;

printedAMENDING billTITLE Amendment11, draftedCHAPTER by:6, ARTICLE 1, ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES, BY ADDING SECTION 11-810.02;

JasonRELATING TheodorouTO FLOORMUNICIPAL AMENDMENTAND EXPLANATIONCOUNTY 1.DEVELOPMENT.

Specifies(TEXT thatOF anBILL applicantBEGINS mayON appealNEXT directlyPAGE) to- thei Attorney- GeneralS.B. if objecting to the methodology, supporting information or conclusions in an individualized determination.

2.1787 Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Arizona:

Requires the Attorney General to treat an appeal as a request made in accordance with statutory requirements for investigating a county, city or town for an alleged violation of state law or the Arizona Constitution.

3.

Removes the specification that an appeal may be filed at the time the applicant receives the individualized determination.

4.

Removes the authorization for an applicant to file an appeal with other matters that arise in the permit review process that is related to the application.

5.

Requires the Attorney General, if an applicant is successful in an appeal, to deem the exaction excessive and waive the exaction.

6.

Requires the Attorney General, if the applicant is successful in an appeal after proceeding under protest to satisfy an exaction, to direct the municipality or county to compensate the applicant for any costs that the applicant has expended in furtherance of the excessive exaction.

7.

Excludes development fees from the definition of exaction.

8.

Narrows the definition of proposed project to any application for use or development of residential real property.

9.

Makes conforming changes.

Amendment explanation prepared by Jason Theodorou 2/26/2026 Fifty-seventh Legislature Petersen Second Regular Session S.B.

1787 PETERSEN FLOOR AMENDMENT SENATE AMENDMENTS TO S.B.

1787 (Reference to printed bill) Amendment instruction key:

[GREEN UNDERLINING IN BRACKETS] indicates text added to statute or previously enacted session law.

[Green underlining in brackets] indicates text added to new session law or text restoring existing law.

[GREEN STRIKEOUT IN BRACKETS] indicates new text removed from statute or previously enacted session law.

[Green strikeout in brackets] indicates text removed from existing statute, previously enacted session law or new session law.

<<Green carets>> indicate a section added to the bill.

<<Green strikeout in carets>> indicates a section removed from the bill.

The bill as proposed to be amended is reprinted as follows:

IF AN APPLICANT OBJECTS TO THE METHODOLOGY, SUPPORTING INFORMATION OR CONCLUSIONS IN THE INDIVIDUALIZED DETERMINATION, THE APPLICANT MAY [FILE AN] APPEAL [DIRECTLYDIRECTLY TO THE ATTORNEY GENERAL.

THE SenateATTORNEY AmendmentsGENERAL toSHALL S.B.TREAT THE APPEAL AS A REQUEST MADE PURSUANT TO SECTION 41-194.01.

1787IN ATTORNEYAN GENERALAPPEAL, SHALLTHE TREATMUNICIPALITY HAS THE APPEALBURDEN ASOF APROOF REQUESTTO MADEDEMONSTRATE PURSUANTTHAT THE EXACTION IS ROUGHLY PROPORTIONAL TO SECTIONTHE 41-194.01].ADVERSE IMPACT OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT.

[THEIF APPEALAN MAYAPPLICANT BEIS FILEDSUCCESSFUL ATIN THEAN TIMEAPPEAL, THE APPLICANTATTORNEY RECEIVESGENERAL THESHALL INDIVIDUALIZEDDEEM DETERMINATIONTHE PURSUANTEXACTION TOEXCESSIVE SUBSECTIONAND CSHALL OFWAIVE THISTHE SECTIONEXACTION OROR, IF THE APPLICANT MAYHAS FILEPROCEEDED ANUNDER APPEALPROTEST WITHPURSUANT OTHERTO MATTERSSUBSECTION THATE ARISEOF INTHIS THESECTION, PERMIT REVIEW PROCESS THAT IS RELATED TO THE APPLICATION.]ATTORNEY INGENERAL ANSHALL APPEAL,DIRECT THE MUNICIPALITY HASTO COMPENSATE THE BURDENAPPLICANT OFFOR PROOFANY TOCOSTS DEMONSTRATE THAT THE EXACTIONAPPLICANT ISHAS ROUGHLYEXPENDED PROPORTIONALIN TOFURTHERANCE THE ADVERSE IMPACT OF THE PROPOSEDEXCESSIVE PROJECT.EXACTION.

[IF AN APPLICANT IS SUCCESSFUL IN AN APPEAL, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL SHALL DEEM THE EXACTION EXCESSIVE AND SHALL WAIVE THE EXACTION OR, IF THE APPLICANT HAS PROCEEDED UNDER PROTEST PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION E OF THIS SECTION, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL SHALL DIRECT THE MUNICIPALITY TO COMPENSATE THE APPLICANT FOR ANY COSTS THAT THE APPLICANT HAS EXPENDED IN FURTHERANCE OF THE EXCESSIVE EXACTION.] E.

F.- 1 - S.B.

1787 F.

(b) DOES NOT INCLUDE[:INCLUDE: