Environment

passed both · Arizona · House Apr 21, 2026

HCM 2009: subsurface minerals; access; federal policy

HCM 2009 is a memorial from Arizona's legislature requesting the federal government to address barriers to accessing subsurface minerals (like copper) under federal land withdrawals, such as national monuments in Arizona. It asks Congress to amend the Antiquities Act to require state consent for new monuments, compensate Arizona for inaccessible mineral rights, and streamline mining permits. The memorial also seeks to rescind specific federal regulations (43 CFR 3809) that Arizona claims incorrectly treat patented surface lands as public lands, complicating mineral exploration. This would primarily affect Arizona's state land department and private mineral exploration companies by reducing regulatory hurdles to develop critical minerals.

Topics ✗ EnvironmentOpposes EnvironmentRequests deregulation of mining access on federal lands by amending Antiquities Act and rescinding regulations, prioritizing mineral extraction over environmental protections.90% confidence | Rep's Stance ✗ Voted No ✓ Supports Environment

Track

passed both · Arizona · House Apr 20, 2026

HCM 2006: endangered species act; urging reform

This Arizona legislative memorial (HCM 2006) urges federal agencies and Congress to reform the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and Migratory Bird Conservation Act. It requests that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Bureau of Land Management, and Forest Service reduce regulatory burdens on ranchers and prevent lease cancellations on federally managed grazing lands due to ESA implementation. The memorial specifically cites concerns about ranchers being unfairly evicted from grazing lands and seeks to align federal policy with "long-standing agricultural practices" in Arizona. As a non-binding memorial, it does not directly change laws but formally requests federal action to address these specific impacts on rural ranching communities.

Topics ✗ EnvironmentOpposes EnvironmentBill explicitly urges reform to reduce ESA regulatory burdens on ranchers and prevent lease cancellations due to ESA implementation, directly weakening environmental protections.95% confidence | Rep's Stance ✗ Voted No ✓ Supports Environment

Track

passed both · Arizona · House Apr 20, 2026

HCM 2011: Mexican wolf; delist; urging support

This Arizona state memorial (HCM 2011) urges Congress to delist the Mexican wolf from the federal endangered species list. It claims the wolf population has exceeded recovery goals since 2014 (286 wild wolves in 2024) and no longer requires ESA protections. The memorial specifically requests Congress pass H.R. 4255 to remove the wolf from the list, defund the federal reintroduction project, transfer management to states, and ensure full compensation for ranchers' livestock losses. It does not create new law but advocates for policy changes to end federal management of the species.

Topics ✗ EnvironmentOpposes EnvironmentUrges delisting Mexican wolf from ESA, defunding federal protections, and transferring management to states - directly weakens endangered species conservation under the Endangered Species Act.95% confidence | Rep's Stance ✗ Voted No ✓ Supports Environment

Track

signed · Arizona · Senate Apr 15, 2026

SB 1503: public pensions; proxy voting

SB 1503 requires Arizona public pension funds to vote shares solely in the economic interest of plan participants and beneficiaries, directly affecting state-run pension managers and proxy advisory firms. It mandates that if a pension fund votes against a company's board recommendation (with majority independent directors), it must provide a documented economic analysis proving the vote aligns with financial goals, not environmental or ideological aims. Funds must annually report such votes and analyses to the state treasurer and back-test their economic models every three years to ensure accuracy. The bill prohibits using votes to advance non-financial goals unless an economic analysis confirms financial benefits, with strict certification requirements for all documentation.

Topics ✓ Budget & TaxesSupports Budget & TaxesRequires economic analysis for pension votes, promoting fiscal responsibility in state fund management per bill's mandate to align with financial goals over ideology.85% confidence ✗ EnvironmentOpposes EnvironmentBill explicitly prohibits pension funds from considering environmental factors in voting decisions, restricting environmental considerations from influencing investment choices.90% confidence | Rep's Stance ✗ Voted No ✓ Supports Environment

vetoed · Arizona · House Apr 13, 2026

HB 2787: federal nullification; Mexican wolf; reintroduction

HB 2787 prohibits Arizona state agencies, employees, and political subdivisions from using state resources to enforce, administer, or cooperate with the federal Mexican wolf reintroduction program under the Endangered Species Act. It directly affects state government operations by banning state involvement in the wolf program, though it exempts the existing livestock loss program managed by the Livestock Loss Board. The bill does not change federal law but aims to limit state-level support for the program, which the legislature claims has exceeded population goals since 2014 and causes economic harm to ranchers. The bill focuses on state authority over resource use, not altering the federal program itself.

Topics ✗ EnvironmentOpposes EnvironmentBlocks state support for federal Mexican wolf reintroduction under ESA, directly restricting endangered species conservation efforts and weakening environmental protection initiatives.95% confidence | Rep's Stance ✗ Voted No ✓ Supports Environment

Track

signed · Arizona · House Apr 13, 2026

HB 2029: water conservation grant fund; disclosure

HB 2029 creates a Water Conservation Grant Fund to support water-saving projects in Arizona. It allows eligible entities (like local governments or nonprofits partnering with them) to apply for grants for conservation programs (up to $3 million) or projects (up to $250,000), requiring a 25% match from other sources. Applicants must disclose projected water savings, the source of saved water (groundwater or surface water), and their plan for using the saved water. The Water Infrastructure Finance Authority must adopt implementing rules within 90 days of the bill's effective date.

Topics ✓ Budget & TaxesSupports Budget & TaxesCreates state-funded grant program for water conservation, allocating budget resources to support conservation initiatives.90% confidence ✓ EnvironmentSupports EnvironmentCreates grant fund for water conservation projects requiring disclosure of water savings and usage plans, directly advancing environmental conservation efforts.95% confidence | Rep's Stance ✓ Voted Yes ✓ Supports Environment

passed · Arizona · Senate Mar 24, 2026

SB 1677: appropriation; salt cedar mitigation

This bill allocates $3 million from the state general fund for salt cedar mitigation along specific sections of the Gila River, managed by the Arizona Department of Forestry and Fire Management. The funds will target areas west of State Route 85 to Gillespie Dam and west of McPhaul Bridge to the Gila River/Colorado River confluence. It is a funding bill with no new policy requirements, exempting the appropriation from standard lapsing rules under Arizona law.

Topics ✓ Budget & TaxesSupports Budget & TaxesAllocates $3M from state general fund for environmental mitigation, directly funding a specific program under budget management.95% confidence ✓ EnvironmentSupports EnvironmentAllocates $3M for salt cedar mitigation, an invasive species harming river ecosystems, directly protecting waterways and native habitats.90% confidence | Rep's Stance ✓ Voted Yes ✓ Supports Environment

Track

vetoed · Arizona · Senate Mar 6, 2026

SB 1439: municipalities; counties; recycling; prohibition

SB 1439 prohibits Arizona municipalities, counties, and other local governments from requiring or recommending that residents recycle products not currently being actively recycled. The bill defines "actively recycled" as a product that is reprocessed into a new item. It amends existing recycling laws for cities (ARS §9-500.07) and counties (ARS §11-269), and adds a new statewide prohibition (ARS §49-707) covering all political subdivisions. This directly affects local governments by restricting their ability to mandate recycling of materials without established processing infrastructure, and impacts residents who may no longer be required to sort certain items into recycling bins. The law takes effect upon enactment.

Topics ✗ EnvironmentOpposes EnvironmentProhibits local governments from mandating recycling of non-active items, limiting environmental protection measures at local level.90% confidence | Rep's Stance ✗ Voted No ✓ Supports Environment

Track