Arizona Legislation 2016

Arizona’s 52nd Legislature – 2nd Regular Session is now in full swing. Below is a brief guide to following legislation in Arizona… For the nuts-and-bolts of how a bill becomes law, the multiple “readings”, and the COW, and so forth, see e.g. this document from

List of Current Bills

…as of Spring 2016 that may be of particular interest to Arizona’s bicyclists.

These bills would ban any local or state police from using any form of photo-enforcement, including red-light enforcement:


Finding Bills

Bills are labeled as either HBxxxx or SBxxxx, depending on whether they originated in the House or the Senate, and ‘x’ a 4 digit number; and note that the numbers get “reused” and are only valid for a particular Session. You can directly search all bills at . This usually isn’t particularly fruitful; other ways are by looking at various interest groups, like the Coalition, or by reading about them in the news, where they will normally mention the bill number.


Tracking Bills with

Most bill-followers will want to set up an account on; though it is not necessary. With an account, you can create lists of bills to track so you won’t have to remember bill numbers; and receive status alerts on those bills.

You also need an account if you ever want to speak (or just formally register your views) at a committee hearing, the “request to speak”. This requires a one-time in-person visit to the capitol to enable your account.

Viewing Bill status

Viewing is as simple as clicking on any of the view links, above. Note the traditional view and apps view are more-or-less the same information presented slightly differently. The ‘apps’ view is generally slicker and easier to use.

One of the most important things to watch for is the “Overview” which will tell you what committees a bill has been assigned to. For example, Sen Farley’s bill SB1349; has been “triple assigned” (assigned to 3 committees plus the Rules committee. Rules is pro-forma) which indicated the bill is going to have a tough time — any committee can ignore a bill and it then dies.  Triple assignment is a signal that the leadership does not want to allow the bill to move forward.

There are many other status views; you can even watch a video of committee hearings online from when the bill was heard (which are also available live), as well as find minutes from the hearings (though these are quite delayed); view sponsors; and with the apps version view who has registered their opinions on the bill. For example, Arizona Citizens Defense League, a Tuscon-based pro-gun rights group has registered opposition to last year’s texting prohibition bill.

Take Action

capital_roofUltimately you will want to take action to influence legislation. One way is via “request to speak”, mentioned above, at a committee hearing. Requesting to speak can also simply be registering your support/opposition, without actually speaking, on a bill.

Should make your views known to your elected officials; the rosters can be found under house/senate at the home page. To locate your elected officials, you can use LAB’s page and enter your zip at “Find Officials”. You have one state senator, and two state representatives.

One Response to “Arizona Legislation 2016”
  1. Ed B says:

    The Senate Trans Committee Hearing for
    SB1241 – photo enforcement prohibition; state highways
    Was pretty interesting

    There are according to the Bill’s sponsor, Representative Debbie Lesko (R-Glendale and Majority whip) only two installations of photo radar anywhere in Arizona on state highways (which is presumably easily knowable since a permit is required)
    One is in El Mirage (at Primrose and Grand — Grand being the state highway) and is in Lesko’s district, and the other is in Star Valley, a very small community towards Payson.

    Lesko also stated that she believes her bill importantly does not usurp any local control — something she would be against — as it only applies to the state highway system.

    An El Mirage constituent gave a long explanation of her complaints about the photo-enforcement (it wasn’t clear if it was speed or red-light or both), saying she was merely “scooting up” to get away from someone who was “on her bumper” and feels the enforcement is unfair and is entrapment. She also says she feels there aren’t enough speed limit signs. I see one here, right near Primrose and Grand, 45mph.

    The town Manager of Star Valley testimony included reading conclusions from the independednt Engineering Study which justifies that use of photo-enforcement (required to get the permit) that the enforcement did indeed improve safety for all road users there. He also mentions any revenues derived by ordinance must be spent on public-safety. He claims town residents overwhelmingly support the installation due to it’s safety benefits from high-speed “through” traffic.

    Noone mentioned, or asked, or whatever, that there must have been an engineering study done for the El Mirage installation that showed a safety benefit (i.e. contrary to the constituent’s complaints).

    One of the committeepeople, in explaining her ‘yes’ vote states that she strongly believes adding more patrol officers will improve safety — she, however, did not pony-up and dough. Talk is cheap.

Leave A Comment