A. A municipal corporation may engage in any business or enterprise which may be engaged in by persons by virtue of a franchise from the municipal corporation, and may construct, purchase, acquire, own and maintain within or without its corporate limits any such business or enterprise. A municipal corporation may also purchase, acquire and own real property for sites and rights-of-way for public utility and public park purposes, and for the location thereon of waterworks, electric and gas plants, municipal quarantine stations, garbage reduction plants, electric lines for the transmission of electricity, pipelines for the transportation of oil, gas, water and sewage, and for plants for the manufacture of any material for public improvement purposes or public buildings. If a municipality provides water to another municipality, the rates it charges for the water to the public in the other municipality shall be one of the following:
1. The same or less than the rates it charges its own residents for water.
2. The same or less than the rates the other municipality charges its residents for water.
3. If the other municipality does not provide water, the average rates charged for water to the residents in the other municipality by private water companies.
4. Rates determined by a contract which is approved by both municipalities and in which such rates are justified by a cost of service study or by any other method agreed to by both municipalities.
B. Nothing in this section shall affect a surcharge on water provided to another municipality adopted prior to July 1, 1986 provided that the surcharge did not exceed thirty per cent of the rates the municipality providing the water charges its own residents and except that any increase in the percentage of such surcharge proposed after August 13, 1986 shall be subject to the requirements of this section.
C. The municipality may exercise the right of eminent domain either within or without its corporate limits for the purposes as stated in subsection A, and may establish, lay and operate a plant, electric line or pipeline upon any land or right-of-way taken thereunder, and may manufacture material for public improvement purposes and barter or exchange it for other material to be used in public improvements in the municipal corporation, or sell it to other municipal corporations for like purposes, and for any and all such purposes.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
16
cases (
1 in the last 5 years), 1961–2022 · leading case:
City of Phoenix v. Harnish, 150 P.3d 245 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2006).
City of Phoenix v. Harnish, 150 P.3d 245 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2006).
· cites it 36× “The court ruled that the City was authorized to condemn the Property pursuant to A.R.S. § 9-511 because the Preserve fulfills a public park purpose.”
City of Surprise v. acc/lake Pleasant, 437 P.3d 865 (Ariz. 2019).
· cites it 6× “15, §§ 2, 3 (excluding municipal corporations from the Commission’s regulatory authority); § 9-511 (empowering municipal corporations to own, operate, and condemn utilities).”
Jung v. City of Phoenix, 770 P.2d 342 (Ariz. 1989).
· cites it 28× “§ 9-516(C) by the Court of Appeals is flawed because the legislative intent on rates to nonresidents was clarified by A.R.S. § 9-511 as amended by Laws 1986. The city asserts that the disposition of this case by the Court of Appeals is improper because it violates the clear…”
City of Casa Grande v. Arizona Water Co., 20 P.3d 590 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2001).
· cites it 6× “The complaint states that the action is brought, inter alia, under the provisions of “Title 9, Chapter 5, Articles 2 and 3,” which are comprised of A.R.S. §§ 9-511 through 9-540. Furthermore, in looking at the statutory scheme as a whole, we find nothing to suggest that the…”
Moore v. City of Page, 713 P.2d 813 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1986).
· cites it 14× “Moore points to three statutes for support: A.R.S. §§ 9-511 and 9-512, which are found in Article 2, and A.”
Town of Marana v. Pima Cnty., 281 P.3d 1010 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2012).
· cites it 2× “Indeed, as pointed out by the County, A.R.S. § 9-511(A) (2008), which authorizes municipalities to engage in business enterprises, permits governmental entities to “purchase, acquire and own real property for sites and rights-of-way for public utility and public park purposes,…”
Sende Vista Water Co., Inc. v. City of Phoenix, 617 P.2d 1158 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1980).
· cites it 6× “The appellee’s request for injunctive relief was prospective only. Appellants urge the court to determine that a municipal corporation has an absolute right to enter an area covered by an existing certificate of convenience and necessity and to provide a public utility service…”
City of Tempe v. Fleming, 815 P.2d 1 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1991).
· cites it 2× “§ 9-276(A)(20) (streets and sewers); A.R.S. §§ 9-511(C), 9-516 and 9-518 (public utilities); A.”
Adams v. Comm'n on Appellate Court Appointments, 254 P.3d 367 (Ariz. 2011).
· cites it 2× “An irrigation district board of directors has broad powers to acquire and sell water and property, appropriate water and money, levy fines, and construct water and electrical delivery systems.”
Adams v. Com'n on Appellate Ct. Appointments, 254 P.3d 367 (Ariz. 2011).
· cites it 2× “An irrigation district board of directors has broad powers to acquire and sell water and property, appropriate water and money, levy fines, and construct water and electrical delivery systems.”
Citizens Utils. Water Co. v. Superior Court, 497 P.2d 55 (Ariz. 1972).
· cites it 2× “A.R.S. § 9-511 grants cities the power to exercise the right of eminent domain within or without the city limits to acquire and build water works, pipe lines, and sites therefor.”
Desert Waters, Inc. v. Superior Court, 370 P.2d 652 (Ariz. 1962).
“Authority to engage in utility business “Before construction, purchase, acquisition or lease by a municipal corporation, *175 as authorized in §§ 9-511 to 9-513, inclusive, of any plant or property or portion thereof devoted to the business of or services rendered by a public…”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 9-511(A) — 3 cases
Jung v. City of Phoenix, 770 P.2d 342 (Ariz. 1989).
“§ 9-516(C) by the Court of Appeals is flawed because the legislative intent on rates to nonresidents was clarified by A.R.S. § 9-511 as amended by Laws 1986. The city asserts that the disposition of this case by the Court of Appeals is improper because it violates the clear…”
City of Phoenix v. Harnish, 150 P.3d 245 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2006).
“The court ruled that the City was authorized to condemn the Property pursuant to A.R.S. § 9-511 because the Preserve fulfills a public park purpose.”
Town of Marana v. Pima Cnty., 281 P.3d 1010 (Ariz. Ct. App. 2012).
“Indeed, as pointed out by the County, A.R.S. § 9-511(A) (2008), which authorizes municipalities to engage in business enterprises, permits governmental entities to “purchase, acquire and own real property for sites and rights-of-way for public utility and public park purposes,…”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 9-511(C) — 3 cases
City of Surprise v. acc/lake Pleasant, 437 P.3d 865 (Ariz. 2019).
“15, §§ 2, 3 (excluding municipal corporations from the Commission’s regulatory authority); § 9-511 (empowering municipal corporations to own, operate, and condemn utilities).”
City of Tempe v. Fleming, 815 P.2d 1 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1991).
“§ 9-276(A)(20) (streets and sewers); A.R.S. §§ 9-511(C), 9-516 and 9-518 (public utilities); A.”
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.