Read the full stored bill text
SB1281 - 572R - S Ver
Senate Engrossed
federal government;
land acquisition; consent
State of Arizona
Senate
Fifty-seventh Legislature
Second Regular Session
2026
SENATE BILL 1281
AN
ACT
amending
section 37-620.03, Arizona Revised Statutes; amending title 37, chapter
4, Arizona Revised Statutes, by adding article 2; relating to United States
land acquisition.
(TEXT OF BILL BEGINS ON NEXT PAGE)
Be it
enacted by the Legislature of the State of Arizona:
Section 1. Section 37-620.03, Arizona Revised
Statutes, is amended to read:
START_STATUTE
37-620.03.
National monuments; catalog; notification; litigation; definition
A. The department shall maintain a catalog of each
existing or newly created
national monument
covered federal designation
in this state. For each
national monument
covered federal designation
,
the department shall request from the federal government the following:
1. A detailed accounting of each individual item
of natural, scenic, historical or cultural value or each resource,
landscape, species, ecosystem, habitat or characteristic
to be
protected.
2. The precise global positioning system location of
each item
of natural, scenic, historical or cultural value or
each resource, landscape, species, ecosystem, habitat or characteristic
to be protected.
3. The square footage that each item
of
natural, scenic, historical or cultural value or each resource, landscape,
species, ecosystem, habitat or characteristic
to be protected occupies.
4. The total square footage of the parcel of land
comprising the
national monument
covered
federal designation
.
5. A peer-reviewed justification for the
protection of the
object
item of natural,
scenic, historical or cultural value or the resource, landscape, species,
ecosystem, habitat or characteristic
by the federal government.
B. The department shall determine whether the limits
of a parcel comprising a
national monument
covered
federal designation
in this state are confined to the smallest area
compatible with the proper care and management of the
objects
item of natural, scenic, historical or cultural value or the
resource, landscape, species, ecosystem, habitat or characteristic
to be
protected by the
national monument
covered
federal designation
.
C. If the department determines pursuant to
subsection B of this section that the limits of a parcel comprising a
national monument
covered federal designation
in this state are not confined to the smallest area compatible with the proper
care and management of the
objects
item of
natural, scenic, historical or cultural value or the resource, landscape,
species, ecosystem, habitat or characteristic
to be protected by the
national monument
covered federal designation
,
the department shall notify the
President of the senate, the
Speaker of the house of representatives and the
attorney
general. On receipt of the notice, the
President of
the senate, the Speaker of the house of representatives or the
attorney
general may commence an action to confine the limits of the parcel comprising
the
national monument
covered federal
designation
to the smallest area compatible with the proper care and
management of the
objects
item of natural,
scenic, historical or cultural value or the resource, landscape, species,
ecosystem, habitat or characteristic
to be protected by the
national monument
covered federal designation
.
D. For the purposes of this section,
"covered federal designation" means any of the following:
1. an Area of critical environmental
concern.
2. a National forest.
3. a National park.
4. a National monument.
5. a National wildlife refuge.
6. a National conservation area.
7. a National recreation area.
8. a National scenic area.
9. a National scenic trail.
10. a National historical trail.
11. a National recreation trail.
12. a Roadless area.
13. a Wild and scenic river.
14. a Wilderness area.
15. a Wilderness study area.
END_STATUTE
Sec. 2.
Heading change
The chapter heading of title 37,
chapter 4, Arizona Revised Statutes, is changed from "ACQUISITION OF
PRIVATE REAL PROPERTY BY STATE OR POLITICAL SUBDIVISION" to
"ACQUISITION OF PRIVATE REAL PROPERTY BY GOVERNMENT ENTITIES".
Sec. 3. Title 37, chapter 4, Arizona Revised
Statutes, is amended by adding article 2, to read:
ARTICLE
2. ACQUISITION OF PRIVATE REAL
PROPERTY
BY FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
START_STATUTE
37-821.
Sale or transfer of private real property to federal government;
notice
On the opening of escrow for the sale or
transfer of title interest of private real property to the federal government
or a federal agency, the escrow agent shall Notify the president of the senate
and the speaker of the house of representatives that a contract for the sale or
transfer of private real property to the federal government or a federal agency
has been placed in escrow.
END_STATUTE
Sec. 4.
Legislative findings
The legislature finds that:
1. At the granting of
statehood, the new State of Arizona was granted the exclusive right to all
lands not assigned under treaty to the Native American tribes.
2. Since the granting
of statehood, numerous lands have been retained by the federal government by
various means by way of congressional action, thus depriving the State of
Arizona of a tax base, which, in comparison to other states, is critical to
funding services such as education, public safety and infrastructure.
3. There are three
primary legal theories available to Arizona to attempt to prove the claim of
tax base in existing American jurisprudence, which are, "the equal
sovereignty principle," "the equal footing doctrine" and "the
compact theory." All three legal theories provide credible
support to the claim of a primary interest in state private property tax base.
4. Arizona relies on
approximately sixteen percent of its land area to fund the critical services of
education, infrastructure, public safety and welfare programs, while other
states enjoy nearly complete access to their lands to generate a survivable tax
base.
5. The equal
sovereignty principle was recently highlighted by the United States Supreme
Court in
Shelby County, Ala. v. Holder
, 570 U.S. 529 (2013), which
challenged the requirement of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (P.L. 89-110,
79 Stat. 437) that certain states preclear their voting laws with the United
States Department of Justice as a violation of the constitutional requirement
that the states in our federal system be equal in sovereignty. The
court applied a heightened level of scrutiny to the preclearance requirements
because they treated Alabama as unequal in sovereignty and ruled that the
preclearance provisions were unconstitutional under the equal sovereignty
principle. For the reasons discussed in detail below, the
legislature finds that section 102(a)(1) of the federal land policy and
management act of 1976 (P.L. 94-579; 90 Stat. 2743), which reversed
almost two hundred years of federal public lands policy from one of disposal to
one of near-permanent retention, treats Arizona as unequal in sovereignty as
compared to the states with dominion over the land within their
borders. This argument, if adopted by the court, would most likely
result in a declaration that the United States cannot forever retain the public
lands within Arizona's borders, not an order transferring the public lands to
the State of Arizona.� Therefore, should the court be persuaded by this
argument, a subsequent political solution negotiated by all stakeholders would
most likely be required to resolve the issue.� A possible outcome of that
political process could be Arizona's ownership of those lands.
6. The equal footing
doctrine is based on the equal sovereignty principle. It requires
that states newly admitted to the Union receive all incidents of sovereignty
enjoyed by the thirteen original states.� The equal footing doctrine considers
only sovereign and political rights of the newly admitted states, not economic
or geographic differences. The original thirteen states stepped into
the shoes of the Crown with regard to dominion over public lands within their
borders. Similarly, Vermont, Kentucky, Tennessee, Maine, Texas and
Hawaii all came into the Union with dominion over their public lands. Dominion
over land has historically been viewed as a key incident of sovereignty, and
denial of that dominion negatively impacts sovereignty in a variety of
ways. Therefore, in order for Arizona to have been admitted as a co-equal
sovereign with the states with dominion over public lands within their borders,
Arizona also should have received on admission dominion over the land within
its borders. A ruling by the United States Supreme Court based on
the equal footing doctrine argument would logically result in the transfer of
public lands to the State of Arizona.
7. The compact theory
posits that the Arizona enabling act was an offer, and Arizona's acceptance of
that offer created a solemn compact. Implicit in that compact was the duty of
the United States to timely dispose of the public lands within Arizona's
borders as it had done with states admitted before Arizona.� There is
historical support for the position that the United States promised to dispose
of the public lands, maintained a policy requiring disposal of public lands and
acted on that policy from 1784 through the date of Arizona's
admission. There is historical evidence that Arizona and the United
States both expected, at the time of Arizona's admission, that the public lands
would be disposed of consistent with past practice.� There is also historical
evidence that the intent of the property clause of the Constitution of the
United States was to dispose of public lands, not to forever retain them.�
Accordingly, an argument can be made that the United States undertook an
obligation to dispose of the public lands within Arizona's borders.
8. Since the United
States has not disposed of the public lands within Arizona, the state relies on
less than sixteen percent of the land it has dominion over as tax base to
generate tax revenue in order to pay for critical services.� Arizona cannot
continue to serve the interests of its citizens if the private property tax
base is taken without careful contemplation of consequences of such transfers
to a government unit, the United States, which does not pay tax, nor does it
compensate for the value of the land it controls through payments in lieu of
taxes.
9. Under article I,
section 8, clause 17, Constitution of the United States, the legislature of
each state has the sole authority to give its consent of all purchases of land,
"to exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such
district (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular
states, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of
the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by
the consent of the legislature of the State in which the same shall be, for the
erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dock yards, and other needful
buildings".
Sec. 5.
Short title
This act may be cited as the
"Tax Base Protection Act".