Legal Opinion
Home Builders Ass'n v. City of Scottsdale
Arizona Supreme Court
Decided January 7, 1997No. CV-95-0160-PRPublishedCited by 42 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
CHARLES E. ARES, Judge Pro Tem.
Driven by the Groundwater Management Act of 1980 to drastically reduce its dependence on underground water, the City of Scottsdale imposed a water resources development fee on all new realty developments. The Home Builders Association of Central Arizona (HBA), some of whose members paid the fee under protest, challenged in superior court the fee’s validity under Arizona’s enabling act, A.R.S. § 9-468.05. The trial court declared the fee invalid on the ground that Scottsdale’s plans to acquire new water were too speculative to confer a beneficial use on…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Village of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Nollan v. California Coastal CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Dolan v. City of TigardSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Wyatt v. WehmuellerArizona Supreme Court · 1991
- City of College Station v. Turtle Rock Corp.Texas Supreme Court · 1984
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by42 opinions
- Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Management Dist.Supreme Court of the United States · 2013
- Town of Flower Mound v. Stafford Estates Ltd. PartnershipTexas Supreme Court · 2004
- Town of Flower Mound v. Stafford Estates Ltd. PartnershipCourt of Appeals of Texas · 2002
- Krupp v. Breckenridge Sanitation DistrictSupreme Court of Colorado · 2001
- Home Builders Ass'n of Greater Des Moines v. City of West Des MoinesSupreme Court of Iowa · 2002
37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.