Arizona Revised Statutes

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 37-202 (2026)

Selection board; powers and duties; distribution of central Arizona project water to state trust lands

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

A. There is established a selection board composed of the governor, the state treasurer exercising those powers of the surveyor-general with respect to the selection of lands as provided in this section and the attorney general.

B. The selection board shall do all things necessary to comply with the laws of the United States and of the state in securing title to the lands granted to the state in quantity or as indemnity by the enabling act, or to any other lands which may be granted to the state.

C. The board shall file upon and select, and cause to be withdrawn and surveyed for selection, lands the commissioner from time to time recommends for selection or for withdrawal and survey.

D. The selection board shall cancel, relinquish and release the claim of the state and reconvey to the United States any tract of land erroneously listed to the state or any tract upon which, at the time of selection or withdrawal, a bona fide claim has been initiated by an actual settler.

E. The board shall designate which of the lands selected shall be assigned to each specific fund designated in the grants made to the state by the United States. The selections shall be apportioned among the various grants so that each fund shall receive as nearly as possible its pro rata share of the different classes of land selected.

F. The board shall determine the distribution of all central Arizona project water allocated for the benefit of state trust lands. All allocations of central Arizona project water made by the selection board shall be used on state trust lands except that if state trust lands to which central Arizona project waters have been allocated are sold, then the central Arizona project water allocated to those lands may be used on those lands.  All allocations of central Arizona project water made by the selection board shall conform to the Arizona state water plan administered by the department of water resources. Allocations greater than ten per cent of the total amount of central Arizona project water available to the state for the benefit of state trust lands shall require legislative approval by concurrent resolution before such allocation is available for use.

G. If state land is included in a proposed corporate limit of a municipality, the selection board, at the commissioner’s request, may render a determination approving or rejecting the inclusion of the state land in the proposed corporate limit.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 1957–2006 · leading case: Cornman Tweedy 560, LLC v. City of Casa Grande, 137 P.3d 309 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2006).
Cornman Tweedy 560, LLC v. City of Casa Grande, 137 P.3d 309 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 7× “] § 37-202.” § 9-471(A)(1). Section 37- 202(A) creates a selection board composed of the governor, the state treasurer, and the 11 attorney general.”
Williams v. State Ex Rel. Morrison, 315 P.2d 981 (Ariz. 1957). · cites it 2× “” A.R.S. § 37-202 (section 11-202, A.C.A. 1939) creates a selection board composed of the governor, state land commissioner and the attorney general and provides that this board shall do everything necessary to comply with United States and state law in securing title “to the…”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 37-202(A) — 1 case
Cornman Tweedy 560, LLC v. City of Casa Grande, 137 P.3d 309 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2006). “] § 37-202.” § 9-471(A)(1). Section 37- 202(A) creates a selection board composed of the governor, the state treasurer, and the 11 attorney general.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 37-202(G) — 1 case
Cornman Tweedy 560, LLC v. City of Casa Grande, 137 P.3d 309 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2006). “] § 37-202.” § 9-471(A)(1). Section 37- 202(A) creates a selection board composed of the governor, the state treasurer, and the 11 attorney general.”
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.