Arizona Revised Statutes

Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 37-291 (2026)

Preferred rights to renewal of lease; exceptions; notification

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section AZ-LEGazleg.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A. On application to the state land department not less than thirty days nor more than one year before the expiration of a lease of state lands, the lessee, if a bona fide resident of this state or legally authorized to transact business in this state, shall have a preferred right to renewal, bearing even date with the expiration of the old lease, for a term not longer than ten years, as determined by the department, at a reappraised rental.

B. The preferred right of renewal shall not extend to a lessee that has not substantially complied with the terms of the lease or that has not placed the land to the use prescribed in the lease during its term or within the time prescribed, unless for good cause the failure to perform was given written authorization by the department. If the department determines the continued leasing of the land is not in the best interest of the state trust, the lease shall not be renewed.

C. Not later than ninety days before the expiration of a lease, the department shall:

1. Notify the lessee by mail of the pending expiration and enclose an application for the lessee to renew the lease.

2. Send a copy of the notice to any parties that have registered with the department as mortgagees or other lienholders of the lessee's interest by certified mail, return receipt requested.

D. The department shall accept renewal applications by mail and may accept renewal applications electronically. The method by which the renewal application is submitted may not be a factor in the department's determination of whether to renew the lease.

E. If the existing lease is not renewed and the existing lessee is in substantial compliance with the terms of the lease and there is not a new lessee or buyer for the land within ninety days after the lease termination, the commissioner must sign an agreement to reimburse the former lessee for the improvements on the lands as provided by section 37-322.01.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 6 cases, 1964–1990 · leading case: Havasu Heights Ranch & Dev. Corp. v. Desert Valley Wood Prods., Inc., 807 P.2d 1119 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1990).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Havasu Heights Ranch & Dev. Corp. v. Desert Valley Wood Prods., Inc., 807 P.2d 1119 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 2× “” A.R.S. § 37-291(B). See Tanner Companies v.”

Cracchiolo v. State, 706 P.2d 1219 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 4× “The appellants cite A.R.S. § 37-291 (Supp.Pamph.1984). That statute has to do with preferred rights of renewal as between competing applicants.”

Havasu Heights Ranch & Dev. Corp. v. State Land Dep't, 764 P.2d 37 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 2× “§§ 37-290 and -335, this preferred right is speculative, and entirely within the control of the promissor, *561 that is, the department.”

Williams v. Greene, 390 P.2d 907 (Ariz. 1964). · cites it 3× “2d at page 212 this Court said: “* * * That section [A.R.S. § 37-291] unquestionably gives a lessee of state land, who applies within the time fixed therein for a renewal, if he is a bonafide resident of the state 'a preferred right of renewal’.”

State Land Dep't v. Painted Desert Park, Inc., 428 P.2d 424 (Ariz. 1967). · cites it 4× “In A.R.S. § 37-291, subsection B, the land commissioner is given the discretionary power to refuse to renew a lease if such a renewal is not in the state’s best interests.”

Ewing v. State, 745 P.2d 947 (Ariz. 1987). · cites it 2× “The preferred right described in this section is subject to the requirements of § 37-291, subsection B, and the preferred right shall expire after the commissioner receives the highest and best bid at public auction.”

— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 37-291(B) — 1 case

Havasu Heights Ranch & Dev. Corp. v. Desert Valley Wood Prods., Inc., 807 P.2d 1119 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1990). “” A.R.S. § 37-291(B). See Tanner Companies v.”

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.