BLAMEHOBBS.COM
IssuesVeto LedgerVeto BlogReceipts

BLAMEHOBBS.COM

Share this page

NicoPAC
Political Advertisement
Paid for by NicoPAC

10% of funds from out-of-state contributors.
Not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee.

Sources include Arizona Legislature bill records, LegiScan session dumps, and published veto letters. Bill numbers cited throughout.

← The Veto Ledger

Vetoed June 19, 2026 · 57th Legislature, 2nd Regular Session

HB2460

business property; theft; penalties; prohibition

BLAME HOBBS!

Taxes & economyHousing & property

THE CONTEXT: A person commits theft if the person knowingly: 1) controls property of another with the intent to deprive the other person of such property; 2) comes into control of lost, mislaid or misdelivered property of another under circumstances providing means of inquiry as to the true owner and appropriates such property to the person's own or another's use without reasonable efforts to notify the true owner; or 3) controls property of another knowing or having reason to know that the property was stolen ( A. R.

WHAT THE BILL DID: The final vetoed version would prohibit a county and municipality from adopting or enforcing an ordinance, rule or regulation that imposes a penalty on a business for the theft of their movable property, restricts a county and municipality from enforcing a penalty that: a; imposes fines for abandoned movable property that belongs to a business that is found off their property; b; requires a business to pay for the retrieval, storage or disposal of their movable property that has been collected by a municipality; and c; mandates a business to certify compliance with a municipal retrieval program under the threat of imposing penalties for noncompliance, and allow a county and municipality to: a; notify a business of the location of their movable property and allow said business to voluntarily retrieve their movable property without imposing a fee; b; institute criminal or civil penalties against a person who is responsible for the theft of a business's movable property; and c; enact general nuisance abatement ordinances, rules or regulations that do not include imposing a penalty on a business for theft of their movable property.

WHY IT MATTERED: The practical reason for this bill was to make the stated financial responsibility enforceable and keep public reporting on time. It would prohibit a county and municipality from adopting or enforcing an ordinance, rule or regulation that imposes a penalty on a business for the theft of their movable property, and would also restricts a county and municipality from enforcing a penalty that: a. imposes fines for abandoned movable property that belongs to a business that is found off their property; b. requires a business to pay for the retrieval, storage or disposal of their movable property that has been collected by a municipality; and c. mandates a business to certify compliance with a municipal retrieval program under the threat of imposing penalties for noncompliance, rather than leave the current rule unchanged.

Legislature recordOfficial bill summaryVeto letter

Share this page

Related vetoes

HB2261

property tax; agricultural real property

2026 · Taxes & economy

SB1162

home-based businesses; restrictions; prohibition

2023 · Taxes & economy

SB1184

municipal tax exemption; residential leases

2023 · Taxes & economy

HB2015

budget procedures; late filing penalty

2026 · Taxes & economy

HB2028

homelessness; indigence; community restitution

2026 · Housing & property

HB2100

small land subdivision; requirements

2026 · Housing & property