Foothills district wins Tucson condemnation case

PHOENIX — The Arizona Supreme Court has upheld the right of school boards to condemn property for roads leading to their buildings.

Without comment, the justices refused to disturb a year-old ruling by the Court of Appeals in a case out of Pima County that said there is no need for specific authorization in Arizona law.

Wednesday’s ruling puts to bed claims by the La Paloma Property Owners Association that Catalina Foothills Unified School District had no right to take control of a private road in the gated community to build a new vehicle entrance to the Valley View Early Learning Center on East Sunrise Drive near East Skyline Drive. The attorney for the homeowners said that right of condemnation is limited to cities, counties and towns.

The appellate court acknowledged the statutes governing schools says only they can condemn property for “buildings and grounds.”

But the judges said the law also permits condemnations where necessary to create access to school buildings and grounds. And they said the conclusion by the district Governing Board that the new access road was necessary for safety reasons cannot be overturned absent some fraud or arbitrary and capricious conduct.

Back to homepage

Subscriber Login

Keep reading with a digital access subscription.

Subscribe now

Court records show when the district acquired the property from the developer, it agreed that vehicles would have to access the school property from either Sunrise Drive or Skyline Drive.

Vehicle access was not to be allowed from Campo Abierto, a private road maintained by the homeowners association that leads to the gated subdivision, with only pedestrian traffic allowed.

The district had tried to use Campo Abierto for vehicular access, only to be slapped down by a different appellate court panel. That led to the decision to condemn the already-existing portion of the road to build a new vehicle access to the school.

Homeowners claim the move damaged property owners who use the same road, creating additional heavy traffic at certain times of the day.

In last week’s order, the Supreme Court upheld a separate part of the appellate court ruling rejecting the contention by homeowners that the district had not obtained required voter approval to condemn the road. The appellate judges said a 2004 bond election authorized the board to acquire the property and spend money “for a new preschool facility.”