Arizona Revised Statutes

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 15-1402 (2026)

Community college districts; requirements; exception

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section AZ-LEGazleg.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A. Community college districts may be organized under this chapter for a single county, two or more contiguous counties or an existing community college district and contiguous counties not part of any community college district if the proposed district has a net assessed valuation, based on the valuation for the preceding year, of at least four hundred forty-eight million seventeen thousand two hundred dollars and a minimum population of forty thousand persons who are fifteen or more years of age, as determined by the most recent federal census.

B. Beginning with fiscal year 1993-1994, the minimum net assessed valuation required to organize a community college district as provided in subsection A of this section increases each year by the percentage change in total net assessed valuation for all of the districts that are organized pursuant to this section with a population of less than five hundred thousand persons according to the most recent United States decennial census using actual net assessed valuation numbers from the prior two years.

C. The requirements of this section do not apply to community college districts organized pursuant to section 15-1402.01.

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 1985–2014 · leading case: Steve Gallardo v. State of Arizona, 336 P.3d 717 (Ariz. 2014).
Steve Gallardo v. State of Arizona, 336 P.3d 717 (Ariz. 2014). · cites it 2× “See AR.S. § 15-1402 (setting requirements for community college districts); id.”
Shepherd v. Brumback, 714 P.2d 450 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 13× “The state board then conducted a survey and determined that the proposed district met the minimum standards of assessed valuation and potential full-time student enrollment required by A.R.S. § 15-1402 (amended 1983) as it then existed.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.