Two words end Arizona's executive-session vote
Two words end Arizona's executive-session vote
2026-09-10 · Arizona · Legislation
An Arizona planned community board may still meet behind closed doors, but from September 12, 2026 it may not decide anything there. SB 1290 adds two words — “without action” — to the open-meeting statute. It was signed on June 22, 2026 as Chapter 222, Laws 2026.1
It is the smallest textual amendment of the seven association bills enacted this session, and arguably the one with the broadest reach into how boards actually run.
What the measure does
A.R.S. § 33-1804(A) currently allows a portion of a meeting to be closed “only if that closed portion of the meeting is limited to consideration of” one of seven listed subjects — legal advice, pending or contemplated litigation, personal health or financial information, employee matters, an owner's appeal of a violation, and so on.2
SB 1290 changes that phrase to read “limited to consideration without action of” the same seven subjects.3 Nothing else in the section changes. A byte-level comparison of the enrolled bill against the statute now in force shows this as the single substantive edit.
Two things it does not do
It does not narrow what may be discussed. The seven permitted subjects are untouched. A board may still take legal advice, weigh litigation, and discuss an employee's performance in private.
It does not reach condominiums. This is the part most likely to be missed. Arizona runs two parallel open-meeting statutes: § 33-1804 for planned communities and § 33-1248 for condominiums. SB 1290 amended only the first. Section 33-1248 still reads “limited to consideration of,” without the new words. A condominium board reading coverage of this bill should not assume the rule now applies to it.
The bill also arrived by an unusual route. Its short title on the legislature's own record is still “agricultural property; inspections; notice” — the subject of the bill as introduced. The association language replaced that content entirely by strike-everything amendment, which is why the enacted act is titled “relating to planned communities” while the tracking record is not.
What it changes for boards and managers
The vote moves into the open meeting; the deliberation need not. The practical shape of a compliant closed session is now: go in, discuss, come out, and vote on the record with the members present. A board that has been resolving matters privately and recording the outcome afterwards has to change its order of operations, not its confidentiality.
Agendas carry more weight than they used to. If the decision has to be made in the open portion, it has to appear on the open agenda, which means the board has to anticipate what it will decide before the closed discussion happens. Boards that treat the closed session as open-ended will find themselves either deciding nothing or deciding something that was never noticed.
“Action” is not defined in the section. The statute does not say whether directing counsel, authorizing a settlement range, or instructing a manager counts. The safer construction, and the one that matches the amendment's evident purpose, treats any binding board decision as action. Consensus that is then ratified in open session is the conservative path.
The courts arrived at the same rule first
Four and a half months before the Governor signed SB 1290, Division One of the Arizona Court of Appeals decided A Z N H Revocable Trust v. Sunland Springs Village HOA, holding that § 33-1804 permits closed-session consideration but requires votes and formal action to occur in an open meeting. The Arizona Supreme Court denied review on September 8, 2026.
So Arizona planned communities now have the same rule from two independent sources, arriving four days apart: a published appellate holding that became final on September 8, and a statutory amendment that takes effect on September 12. For a board, the significance of the overlap is that the rule does not depend on either one surviving alone.
It also resolves a timing question. Because Sunland Springs construes the statute as it already stood, its holding is not limited to conduct after September 12 in the way the amendment is.
What to watch next
Whether condominiums are brought into line. The asymmetry between § 33-1804 and § 33-1248 is now conspicuous, and it is the kind of gap that ordinarily draws a clean-up bill.
What remedy attaches. Section 33-1804 carries no express remedy for a violation. An owner's routes are the ADRE petition process under A.R.S. § 32-2199.01 and an action in superior court, where the question of whether an improperly taken action is void or merely voidable is not settled by the text.
Minute-taking practice. Nothing in the amendment requires minutes of the closed portion. What it does require is that the open minutes show a vote that previously might have appeared nowhere.
Related Arizona HOA Topics
Stay on top of Arizona HOA law
Every week: new Arizona legislation, court rulings, and regulatory developments affecting condos, planned communities, and property managers. Free.
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.