Frequently Searched

Arizona Court Makes Clear: Cities Cannot Pass the Buck on Homeless Encampments

June 18, 2025

The Arizona Court of Appeals handed property owners a crucial victory weeks ago in a ruling against Tucson’s policies of allowing homeless encampments on city-owned property. Following a decision against the city of Phoenix last year, the judges held that when Tucson officials refused to enforce anti-camping ordinances, and effectively encouraged law-breaking in areas that harmed neighboring property owners, they created a “nuisance” and can be held liable in court. The ruling sets a critical precedent not just in Tucson, but throughout Arizona, particularly given the state’s newly adopted Prop. 312, which protects landowners against cities’ willful refusal to enforce the law.

The story begins in 2024, when Arizona judges held that Phoenix created a nuisance by operating the nation’s largest homeless encampment on a region of downtown streets known as “The Zone.” Phoenix officials not only allowed over 1,000 people to live in tents on streets and sidewalks in The Zone—thus ruining local businesses and creating dangerous and unsanitary conditions for both residents and the homeless—but effectively declared that the law would not be enforced there. The result was an upsurge in crime, including arson and murder.  A group of residents went to court, arguing that the city was operating a nuisance (a legal term that means an activity that substantially interferes with other people’s property), and won.

Shortly afterwards, Tucson residents filed suit against that city, which since 2019 had allowed the homeless population to live in tents in public parks and an area known as Navajo Wash. This tent city included makeshift toilets, open fires, and a rash of criminal behavior, including violent crime—all harming neighboring landowners.

The Tucson case differed from the Phoenix case in some important respects, however. For one thing, the city claimed that, unlike Phoenix, it was not actively encouraging people to live in Navajo Wash. Instead, it adopted what it called a “three tier” system for homeless encampments. “Low-priority encampments” were allowed to remain, with the city providing trash cleanup, whereas “high problem” encampments were required to vacate within 72 hours of a city notice. This, Tucson claimed, proved that it wasn’t actively fostering the encampments as Phoenix had done. A trial judge agreed, holding that the city could not be held liable for the nuisance.

But in a unanimous ruling on May 25, the Arizona Court of Appeals reversed that decision. Under state law, it said, a nuisance is “anything injurious to health, indecent, offensive to the senses or an obstruction to the free use of property that interferes with the comfortable enjoyment of life or property by an entire community or neighborhood,” and the Navajo Wash encampments clearly qualified. And the “three tier” system only proved that Tucson “consent[ed] to camping in the Navajo Wash…. It allows the homeless population to continue to return to the Navajo Wash after each abatement and clean-up…. Because the City knew the activity of homeless camping in this location was being carried on and … repeatedly and continually caused a nuisance, yet consented to it anyway,” it could be held liable under Arizona’s anti-nuisance laws.

That ruling is welcome news to the hardworking taxpayers of Tucson, who are the real victims of the city’s refusal to enforce the law. Arizona home- and business owners pay taxes in exchange for police protection and other public services. When they’re denied those protections, they are not only being deprived of their earnings unjustly, but they’re being effectively double-taxed, because they have to take steps on their own to protect themselves and their property against the dangerous and unsanitary consequences of homeless encampments.

That’s why Arizona voters last year adopted Prop. 312, which provides that landowners who are forced to shoulder the cost of defending themselves against nuisance activities such as encampments—by, for example, installing bars on their windows, or hiring security guards for their businesses—are entitled to a refund for those expenses. What’s more, Prop. 312, ensures that the offending municipalities are not allowed to collect money for public health and safety services which they then choose not to provide. In short, if the government’s not going to protect people, it shouldn’t be allowed to keep their tax money.

The Tucson ruling makes clear that even when a city’s dereliction of duty doesn’t rise to the same extreme as the Phoenix Zone case, Prop. 312’s rule can still apply. And, in fact, the first Prop. 312 claims have already been filed by some Tucson residents.

There’s no doubt that the homeless problem is complicated, and that it needs to be dealt with humanely. But the “solution” adopted by Progressive cities in the past few years—of simply leaving people on the streets—is neither compassionate for the homeless themselves, nor fair to the hardworking residents of our cities, whose property is damaged, whose personal safety is threatened, and whose tax dollars are wasted by the refusal to enforce the law.

Arizonans interested in filing a Prop. 312 claim due to their local government’s refusal to enforce nuisance laws can learn more at the Department of Revenue’s website. And if you want to learn more about how to bring Prop. 312 to your state, you can read about it here.

Timothy Sandefur is Vice President for Legal Affairs at the Goldwater Institute’s Scharf-Norton Center for Constitutional Litigation.

 

 

More on this issue

Donate Now

Help all Americans live freer, happier lives. Join the Goldwater Institute as we defend and strengthen freedom in all 50 states.

Donate Now

Since 1988, the Goldwater Institute has been in the liberty business — defending and promoting freedom, and achieving more than 400 victories in all 50 states. Donate today to help support our mission.

We Protect Your Rights

Our attorneys defend individual rights and protect those who cannot protect themselves.

Need Help? Submit a case.

Get Connected to Goldwater

Sign up for the latest news, event updates, and more.

Wait! Don’t close this yet!

We are grateful for your support of the Goldwater Institute’s efforts to advance and defend liberty throughout the United States. For over 36 years, we’ve been defending the rights of Americans to live their lives free from government interference.

And Goldwater is unique in that we direct our efforts to the 50 states where we introduce and advance innovative ideas that expand freedom. And we fight in courtrooms and capitals nationwide to defend individual liberty.

In 2024 alone, we scored over 50 policy and litigation victories defending liberty!

And that’s just the beginning.

Our plans for 2025 include:

  • Stopping pernicious DEI and other woke programs in America’s universities.
  • Ensuring that patients suffering from rare and terminal diseases have access to cutting-edge, lifesaving medical treatments, without having to first seek permission from the government.
  • Defending parental rights across the United States so that parents can send their kids to the school that best fits their needs, free from leftist indoctrination.
  • Eliminating government interference in the fundamental right of individuals to own property and use it as they see fit.
  • And much, much more

We seek to restore the presumption of liberty; that people are free to act without first asking permission from the government.

But we cannot do this without you. Will you join us as we fight to preserve and advance liberty throughout the country? As we seek new and innovative ways to defend freedom in all 50 states?

And there’s great news: Thanks to a generous Goldwater supporter, your donation today will be doubled!

So please, join us in fighting to advance liberty and score real wins for freedom from coast to coast!