Back to Arizona

SB1787 • 2026

exactions; individualized determinations; appeal

SB1787 - exactions; individualized determinations; appeal

Vetoed

The latest official action shows the governor vetoed this bill. Check the bill history to see whether lawmakers later overrode that veto.

Sponsor
Warren Petersen
Last action
2026-04-07
Official status
Governor vetoed
Effective date
Not listed

Plain English Breakdown

The bill was vetoed by the governor, but it's unclear if lawmakers will override this veto.

Exactions; Individualized Determinations; Appeal

This bill requires municipalities and counties to provide detailed justifications for fees imposed on developers, allows developers to appeal these decisions directly to the Attorney General, and mandates that exactions are waived if not justified within 60 days.

What This Bill Does

  • Requires a municipality or county to give written notice before imposing an exaction (a fee or condition) on a developer.
  • Allows developers to request an individualized determination from the municipality or county explaining why the exaction is necessary and how it was calculated.
  • Specifies that if the municipality or county does not provide this detailed analysis within 60 days, the exaction is waived.
  • Gives developers the right to appeal the decision directly to the Attorney General if they disagree with the individualized determination.

Who It Names or Affects

  • Developers who apply for permits or approvals from municipalities or counties.
  • Municipalities and counties imposing exactions on developers.

Terms To Know

Exaction
A fee, dedication, or condition imposed by a municipality or county as part of granting a permit for development.
Individualized determination
A detailed written analysis that assesses whether an exaction is proportional to the adverse impacts of a proposed project.

Limits and Unknowns

  • The bill was vetoed by the governor, but it's unclear if lawmakers will override this veto.
  • It does not specify what happens if developers do not appeal within the given timeframe.
  • Does not address how municipalities and counties will fund the costs of providing individualized determinations.

Amendments

These notes stay tied to the official amendment files and metadata from the legislature.

Plain English: Amendment explanation prepared by Jason Theodorou 2/26/2026 Bill Number: S.B.

  • Amendment explanation prepared by Jason Theodorou 2/26/2026 Bill Number: S.B.
  • 1787 Petersen Floor Amendment Reference to: printed bill Amendment drafted by: Jason Theodorou FLOOR AMENDMENT EXPLANATION 1.
  • Specifies that an applicant may appeal directly to the Attorney General if objecting to the methodology, supporting information or conclusions in an individualized determination.
  • 2.
  • This amendment summary is using official source text because generated interpretation was skipped for this run.

Bill History

  1. 2026-04-02 V

    Governor vetoed

  2. 2026-04-01 Senate

    Transmitted to Senate

  3. 2026-04-01 House

    House third read passed

  4. 2026-03-24 House

    House minority caucus

  5. 2026-03-24 House

    House majority caucus

  6. 2026-03-23 House

    House consent calendar

  7. 2026-03-05 House

    House second read

  8. 2026-03-04 House

    House Rules: C&P

  9. 2026-03-04 House

    House Commerce: DP

  10. 2026-03-04 House

    House first read

  11. 2026-02-27 House

    Transmitted to House

  12. 2026-02-26 Senate

    Senate third read passed

  13. 2026-02-26 Senate

    Senate committee of the whole

  14. 2026-02-26 Senate

    Senate committee of the whole

  15. 2026-02-23 Senate

    Senate minority caucus

  16. 2026-02-23 Senate

    Senate majority caucus

  17. 2026-02-23 Senate

    Senate consent calendar

  18. 2026-02-09 Senate

    Senate second read

  19. 2026-02-05 Senate

    Senate Rules: PFC

  20. 2026-02-05 Senate

    Senate Regulatory Affairs and Government Efficiency: DP

  21. 2026-02-05 Senate

    Senate first read

Official Summary Text

SB1787 - exactions; individualized determinations; appeal

Current Bill Text

Read the full stored bill text
SB1787 - 572R - S Ver

Senate Engrossed

exactions;
individualized determinations; appeal

State of Arizona

Senate

Fifty-seventh Legislature

Second Regular Session

2026

SENATE BILL 1787

AN
ACT

amending title 9, chapter 4, article 6.2,
arizona revised statutes, by adding section 9-463.07; amending title 11,
chapter 6, article 1, arizona revised statutes, by adding section 11-810.02;
relating to municipal and county development.

(TEXT OF BILL BEGINS ON NEXT PAGE)

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

Section 1. Title 9, chapter 4, article 6.2,
Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended by adding section 9-463.07, to read:

START_STATUTE
9-463.07.

Exactions; mitigation costs; individualized determination;
appeal; protest; definitions

A. Notwithstanding any other law, a
municipality may not impose an exaction on an applicant for any proposed
project without a written notice to the applicant of the required exaction.

B. On receipt of the written notice
required by subsection A of this section, the applicant may request an
individualized determination that demonstrates the basis for the exaction being
imposed on the proposed project.� The individuALIzed determination shall
include the methodology, supporting data and any information that is used to
DETERMINE the adverse impact that is anticipated to result from the proposed
project and the method of calculating the exaction amount based on that
identified adverse impact.� The municipality shall pay for the INDIVIDUALIZED
determination required pursuant to this subsection.

C. The municipality shall provide the
completed individualized determination required pursuant to subsection B of
this section within sixty days after receiving the request from the applicant
for the individualized determination.� Unless an applicant files an appeal, the
individualized determination shall be the final determination.� If the
individualized determination is not completed and delivered to the applicant
within sixty days after receiving the request for the individualized determination
from the applicant, the exaction is deemed excessive and is waived.

D. iF an APPLICANT OBJECTS TO THE
METHODOLOGY, SUPPORTING INFORMATION OR CONCLUSIONS IN THE INDIVIDUALIZED
DETERMINATION, THE APPLICANT MAY APPEAL
directly to the
attorney general. The attorney general shall treat the appeal as a
request made pursuant to section 41-194.01.� iN AN APPEAL, THE
MUNICIPALITY has THE burden of proof to demonstrate that the exaction is
roughly proportional to the adverse impact of the proposed project.�
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. An applicant may elect to proceed
under protest and satisfy a required exaction while the exaction is being
appealed. Any satisfaction of an exaction under protest may not be construed as
a waiver of any objections or appeals or right to judicial review of the
exaction.� the municipality may not require the applicant to satisfy the
exaction as a prerequisite to appeal the validity of the individualized
determination provided pursuant to subsection C of this section.

F. An applicant may bring an action
in an appropriate court to challenge the validity of the individualized
determination or the exaction.� The court shall review the exaction de novo.�
THE MUNICIPALITY has THE burden of proof to demonstrate that the exaction is
roughly proportional to the adverse impact of the proposed project.� The court
shall award compensatory damages and attorney fees to a prevailing applicant
that brings an action pursuant to this subsection.

G. For the purposes of this section:

1. "Exaction":

(
a
) means any
fee, dedication or condition that is imposed by a municipality on an applicant
or property owner as a condition of granting a permit Or other approval for the
proposed project.

(
b
) does not
include
:

(
i
) development
fees collected pursuant to section 9-463.05.

(
ii
) Fees for
municipal services
.

(
iii
) regular
permit application fees.

2. "Individualized
determination" means a written analysis that is specific to the proposed
Project to assess whether an exaction, including a development or mitigation
fee, is roughly proportional in nature and extent to the adverse impacts of the
proposed project.

3. "Proposed project" means
any application for use or development of residential real property.
END_STATUTE

Sec. 2. Title 11, chapter 6, article 1, Arizona
Revised Statutes, is amended by adding section 11-810.02, to read:

START_STATUTE
11-810.02.

Exactions; mitigation costs; individualized determination;
appeal; protest; definitions

A. Notwithstanding any other law, a
county may not impose an exaction on an applicant for any proposed project
without a written notice to the applicant of the required exaction.

B. On receipt of the written notice
required by subsection A of this section, the applicant may request an
individualized determination that demonstrates the basis for the exaction being
imposed on the proposed project.� The individualized determination shall
include the methodology, supporting data and any information that is used to
DETERMINE the adverse impact that is anticipated to result from the proposed
project and the method of calculating the exaction amount based on that
identified adverse impact. The county shall pay for the
INDIVIDUALIZED determination required pursuant to this subsection.

C. The county shall provide the
completed individualized determination required pursuant to subsection B of
this section within sixty days after receiving the request from the applicant
for the individualized determination.� Unless an applicant files an appeal, the
individualized determination shall be the final determination.� If the
individualized determination is not completed and delivered to the applicant
within sixty days after receiving the request for the individualized
determination from the applicant, the exaction is deemed excessive and is
waived.

D. iF An APPLICANT OBJECTS TO THE
METHODOLOGY, SUPPORTING INFORMATION OR CONCLUSIONS IN THE INDIVIDUALIZED
DETERMINATION, THE APPLICANT MAY APPEAL
directly to the
attorney general.� The attorney general shall treat the appeal as a request
made pursuant to section 41-194.01. iN AN APPEAL, THE county
has THE burden of proof to demonstrate that the exaction is roughly
proportional to the adverse impact of the proposed project.�
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 county to compensate the applicant for any
costs that the applicant has expended in furtherance of the excessive exaction.

E. An applicant may elect to proceed
under protest and satisfy a required exaction while the exaction is being
appealed.� Any satisfaction of an exaction under protest may not be construed
as a waiver of any objections or appeals or right to judicial review of the
exaction.� the county may not require the applicant to satisfy the exaction as
a prerequisite to appeal the validity of the individualized determination
provided pursuant to subsection C of this section.

F. An applicant may bring an action
in an appropriate court to challenge the validity of the individualized
determination or the exaction.� The court shall review the exaction de novo.�
THE County has THE burden of proof to demonstrate that the exaction is roughly
proportional to the adverse impact of the proposed project.� The court shall
award compensatory damages and attorney fees to a prevailing applicant that
brings an action pursuant to this subsection.

G. For the purposes of this section:

1. "Exaction":

(
a
) means any
fee, dedication or condition that is imposed by a county on an applicant or
property owner as a condition of granting a permit Or other approval for the
proposed project.

(
b
) does not
include
:

(
i
) development
fees collected pursuant to section 11-1102.

(
ii
) Fees for
county services
.

(
iii
) regular
permit application fees.

2. "Individualized
determination" means a written analysis that is specific to the proposed
Project to assess whether an exaction, including a development or mitigation
fee, is roughly proportional in nature and extent to the adverse impacts of the
proposed project.

3. "Proposed project" means
any application for use or development of residential real property.
END_STATUTE