Panel advances bill requiring inspectors to notify owners and provide reports for property inspections

House Bill 2105, which would require advanced notice for some property inspections and a written inspection report to the owner, was returned with a due-pass recommendation after testimony that balanced transparency goals against practical concerns.

Sponsor Representative Carter said the bill offers property owners the opportunity to be present for inspections and to receive an inspection report explaining why agricultural status was denied. Patrick Bray of the Arizona Farm and Ranch Group testified the change could avoid costly appeals by clarifying findings early and accounting for seasonal practices that can make livestock hard to see during drive-by inspections.

Maricopa County Assessor Eddie Cook said the assessor offices had previously worked on notice processes, including certified mail when removing classification, but that many property owners still do not respond. Cook noted statutory authority allowing assessors to inspect without notice and said he is concerned that notice requirements and a mandated inspection report in statute may not solve the underlying compliance problem; he also said counties do not share a standard inspection-report form and that producing and mailing reports across 15 counties could be costly.

Members pressed Cook for data. He said Maricopa County has about 1,800,000 parcels, roughly 3,000 appeals annually, and an assessor office budget just north of $30,000,000; mailings alone cost a material amount (he estimated under $10,000,000 for typical annual mailings). Supporters and some members said transparency and a standardized inspection report could help property owners and streamline appeals, while others warned of unfunded mandates and implementation costs for rural counties.

The committee moved and returned HB2105 with a due-pass recommendation by recorded vote (5 ayes, 4 nays).