Arizona Governor Has Signed Abortion Bill HB 2036 Into Law

http://directorsblog.health.azdhs.gov:  From the Arizona Department of Health blog, the Arizona Governor has signed HB 2036.  The full text is here.  Notable provisions include but are not limited to the requirement that for any facility where abortions are performed, the facility must conspicuously post signs outside and inside, where visible to patients, that it is unlawful for a woman to be forced to have an abortion.  Another notable is that no contract may require a woman to have an abortion.

 

Text of Arizona HB 2549 – the Internet Censorship Bill

HOUSE BILL 2549
an Act

amending sections 13-2916 and 13-2923, Arizona Revised Statutes; relating to electronic or digital devices.

Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Arizona:

Section 1. Section 13-2916, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended to read:

13-2916. Use of an electronic or digital device to terrify, intimidate, threaten, harass, annoy or offend; classification; definition

A. It is unlawful for any person, with intent to terrify, intimidate, threaten, harass, annoy or offend, to use a telephone any electronic or digital device and use any obscene, lewd or profane language or suggest any lewd or lascivious act, or threaten to inflict physical harm to the person or property of any person. It is also unlawful to otherwise disturb by repeated anonymous telephone calls electronic or digital communications the peace, quiet or right of privacy of any person at the place where the telephone call or calls communications were received.

B. Any offense committed by use of a telephone an electronic or digital device as set forth in this section is deemed to have been committed at either the place where the telephone call or calls communications originated or at the place where the telephone call or calls communications were received.

C. Any person who violates this section is guilty of a class 1 misdemeanor.

D. For the purposes of this section, “electronic or digital device” includes any wired or wireless communication device and multimedia storage device.

Sec. 2. Section 13-2923, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended to read:

13-2923. Stalking; classification; definitions

A. A person commits stalking if the person intentionally or knowingly engages in a course of conduct that is directed toward another person and if that conduct either:

1. Would cause a reasonable person to fear for the person’s safety or the safety of that person’s immediate family member and that person in fact fears for their the person’s safety or the safety of that person’s immediate family member.

2. Would cause a reasonable person to fear death of that person or that person’s immediate family member and that person in fact fears death of that person or that person’s immediate family member.

B. Stalking under subsection A, paragraph 1 of this section is a class 5 felony. Stalking under subsection A, paragraph 2 of this section is a class 3 felony.

C. For the purposes of this section:

1. “Course of conduct”:

(a) Means any of the following:

(i) Maintaining visual or physical proximity to a specific person or directing verbal, written or other threats, whether express or implied, to a specific person on two or more occasions over a period of time, however short, but

(ii) Using any electronic, digital or global positioning system device to surveil a specific person or a specific person’s internet or wireless activity continuously for twelve hours or more or on two or more occasions over a period of time, however short.

(b) Does not include constitutionally protected activity or other activity authorized by law, the other person, the other person’s authorized representative or if the other person is a minor, the minor’s parent or guardian.

2. “Immediate family member” means a spouse, parent, child or sibling or any other person who regularly resides in a person’s household or resided in a person’s household within the past six months.

Text of Arizona House Bill 2625 – the Contraception Bill

House Bill 2625
an Act

Amending sections 20‑826, 20‑1057.08, 20‑1402, 20‑1404 and 20‑2329, Arizona Revised Statutes; relating to health insurance.

Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Arizona:

Section 1. Section 20-826, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended to read:

20-826. Subscription contracts; definitions

A. A contract between a corporation and its subscribers shall not be issued unless the form of such contract is approved in writing by the director.

B. Each contract shall plainly state the services to which the subscriber is entitled and those to which the subscriber is not entitled under the plan, and shall constitute a direct obligation of the providers of services with which the corporation has contracted for hospital, medical, dental or optometric services.

C. Each contract, except for dental services or optometric services, shall be so written that the corporation shall pay benefits for each of the following:

1. Performance of any surgical service that is covered by the terms of such contract, regardless of the place of service.

2. Any home health services that are performed by a licensed home health agency and that a physician has prescribed in lieu of hospital services, as defined by the director, providing the hospital services would have been covered.

3. Any diagnostic service that a physician has performed outside a hospital in lieu of inpatient service, providing the inpatient service would have been covered.

4. Any service performed in a hospital’s outpatient department or in a freestanding surgical facility, if such service would have been covered if performed as an inpatient service.

D. Each contract for dental or optometric services shall be so written that the corporation shall pay benefits for contracted dental or optometric services provided by dentists or optometrists.

E. Any contract, except accidental death and dismemberment, applied for that provides family coverage, as to such coverage of family members, shall also provide that the benefits applicable for children shall be payable with respect to a newly born child of the insured from the instant of such child’s birth, to a child adopted by the insured, regardless of the age at which the child was adopted, and to a child who has been placed for adoption with the insured and for whom the application and approval procedures for adoption pursuant to section 8‑105 or 8‑108 have been completed to the same extent that such coverage applies to other members of the family. The coverage for newly born or adopted children or children placed for adoption shall include coverage of injury or sickness, including necessary care and treatment of medically diagnosed congenital defects and birth abnormalities. If payment of a specific premium is required to provide coverage for a child, the contract may require that notification of birth, adoption or adoption placement of the child and payment of the required premium must be furnished to the insurer within thirty‑one days after the date of birth, adoption or adoption placement in order to have the coverage continue beyond the thirty‑one day period.

F. Each contract that is delivered or issued for delivery in this state after December 25, 1977 and that provides that coverage of a dependent child shall terminate on attainment of the limiting age for dependent children specified in the contract shall also provide in substance that attainment of such limiting age shall not operate to terminate the coverage of such child while the child is and continues to be both incapable of self‑sustaining employment by reason of intellectual disability or physical handicap and chiefly dependent on the subscriber for support and maintenance. Proof of such incapacity and dependency shall be furnished to the corporation by the subscriber within thirty‑one days of the child’s attainment of the limiting age and subsequently as may be required by the corporation, but not more frequently than annually after the two‑year period following the child’s attainment of the limiting age.

G. No corporation may cancel or refuse to renew any subscriber’s contract without giving notice of such cancellation or nonrenewal to the subscriber under such contract. A notice by the corporation to the subscriber of cancellation or nonrenewal of a subscription contract shall be mailed to the named subscriber at least forty‑five days before the effective date of such cancellation or nonrenewal. The notice shall include or be accompanied by a statement in writing of the reasons for such action by the corporation.� Failure of the corporation to comply with this subsection shall invalidate any cancellation or nonrenewal except a cancellation or nonrenewal for nonpayment of premium.

H. A contract that provides coverage for surgical services for a mastectomy shall also provide coverage incidental to the patient’s covered mastectomy for surgical services for reconstruction of the breast on which the mastectomy was performed, surgery and reconstruction of the other breast to produce a symmetrical appearance, prostheses, treatment of physical complications for all stages of the mastectomy, including lymphedemas, and at least two external postoperative prostheses subject to all of the terms and conditions of the policy.

I. A contract that provides coverage for surgical services for a mastectomy shall also provide coverage for mammography screening performed on dedicated equipment for diagnostic purposes on referral by a patient’s physician, subject to all of the terms and conditions of the policy and according to the following guidelines:

1. A baseline mammogram for a woman from age thirty‑five to thirty‑nine.

2. A mammogram for a woman from age forty to forty‑nine every two years or more frequently based on the recommendation of the woman’s physician.

3. A mammogram every year for a woman fifty years of age and over.

J. Any contract that is issued to the insured and that provides coverage for maternity benefits shall also provide that the maternity benefits apply to the costs of the birth of any child legally adopted by the insured if all of the following are true:

1. The child is adopted within one year of birth.

2. The insured is legally obligated to pay the costs of birth.

3. All preexisting conditions and other limitations have been met by the insured.

4. The insured has notified the insurer of the insured’s acceptability to adopt children pursuant to section 8‑105, within sixty days after such approval or within sixty days after a change in insurance policies, plans or companies.

K. The coverage prescribed by subsection J of this section is excess to any other coverage the natural mother may have for maternity benefits except coverage made available to persons pursuant to title 36, chapter 29 but not including coverage made available to persons defined as eligible under section 36‑2901, paragraph 6, subdivisions (b), (c), (d) and (e).� If such other coverage exists, the agency, attorney or individual arranging the adoption shall make arrangements for the insurance to pay those costs that may be covered under that policy and shall advise the adopting parent in writing of the existence and extent of the coverage without disclosing any confidential information such as the identity of the natural parent.� The insured adopting parents shall notify their insurer of the existence and extent of the other coverage.

L. The director may disapprove any contract if the benefits provided in the form of such contract are unreasonable in relation to the premium charged.

M. The director shall adopt emergency rules applicable to persons who are leaving active service in the armed forces of the United States and returning to civilian status including:

1. Conditions of eligibility.

2. Coverage of dependents.

3. Preexisting conditions.

4. Termination of insurance.

5. Probationary periods.

6. Limitations.

7. Exceptions.

8. Reductions.

9. Elimination periods.

10. Requirements for replacement.

11. Any other condition of subscription contracts.

N. Any contract that provides maternity benefits shall not restrict benefits for any hospital length of stay in connection with childbirth for the mother or the newborn child to less than forty‑eight hours following a normal vaginal delivery or ninety‑six hours following a cesarean section.� The contract shall not require the provider to obtain authorization from the corporation for prescribing the minimum length of stay required by this subsection. The contract may provide that an attending provider in consultation with the mother may discharge the mother or the newborn child before the expiration of the minimum length of stay required by this subsection. The corporation shall not:

1. Deny the mother or the newborn child eligibility or continued eligibility to enroll or to renew coverage under the terms of the contract solely for the purpose of avoiding the requirements of this subsection.

2. Provide monetary payments or rebates to mothers to encourage those mothers to accept less than the minimum protections available pursuant to this subsection.

3. Penalize or otherwise reduce or limit the reimbursement of an attending provider because that provider provided care to any insured under the contract in accordance with this subsection.

4. Provide monetary or other incentives to an attending provider to induce that provider to provide care to an insured under the contract in a manner that is inconsistent with this subsection.

5. Except as described in subsection O of this section, restrict benefits for any portion of a period within the minimum length of stay in a manner that is less favorable than the benefits provided for any preceding portion of that stay.

O. Nothing in subsection N of this section:

1. Requires a mother to give birth in a hospital or to stay in the hospital for a fixed period of time following the birth of the child.

2. Prevents a corporation from imposing deductibles, coinsurance or other cost sharing in relation to benefits for hospital lengths of stay in connection with childbirth for a mother or a newborn child under the contract, except that any coinsurance or other cost sharing for any portion of a period within a hospital length of stay required pursuant to subsection N of this section shall not be greater than the coinsurance or cost sharing for any preceding portion of that stay.

3. Prevents a corporation from negotiating the level and type of reimbursement with a provider for care provided in accordance with subsection N of this section.

P. Any contract that provides coverage for diabetes shall also provide coverage for equipment and supplies that are medically necessary and that are prescribed by a health care provider, including:

1. Blood glucose monitors.

2. Blood glucose monitors for the legally blind.

3. Test strips for glucose monitors and visual reading and urine testing strips.

4. Insulin preparations and glucagon.

5. Insulin cartridges.

6. Drawing up devices and monitors for the visually impaired.

7. Injection aids.

8. Insulin cartridges for the legally blind.

9. Syringes and lancets, including automatic lancing devices.

10. Prescribed oral agents for controlling blood sugar that are included on the plan formulary.

11. To the extent coverage is required under medicare, podiatric appliances for prevention of complications associated with diabetes.

12. Any other device, medication, equipment or supply for which coverage is required under medicare from and after January 1, 1999. The coverage required in this paragraph is effective six months after the coverage is required under medicare.

Q. Nothing in subsection P of this section prohibits a medical service corporation, a hospital service corporation or a hospital, medical, dental and optometric service corporation from imposing deductibles, coinsurance or other cost sharing in relation to benefits for equipment or supplies for the treatment of diabetes.

R. Any hospital or medical service contract that provides coverage for prescription drugs shall not limit or exclude coverage for any prescription drug prescribed for the treatment of cancer on the basis that the prescription drug has not been approved by the United States food and drug administration for the treatment of the specific type of cancer for which the prescription drug has been prescribed, if the prescription drug has been recognized as safe and effective for treatment of that specific type of cancer in one or more of the standard medical reference compendia prescribed in subsection S of this section or medical literature that meets the criteria prescribed in subsection S of this section.� The coverage required under this subsection includes covered medically necessary services associated with the administration of the prescription drug.� This subsection does not:

1. Require coverage of any prescription drug used in the treatment of a type of cancer if the United States food and drug administration has determined that the prescription drug is contraindicated for that type of cancer.

2. Require coverage for any experimental prescription drug that is not approved for any indication by the United States food and drug administration.

3. Alter any law with regard to provisions that limit the coverage of prescription drugs that have not been approved by the United States food and drug administration.

4. Notwithstanding section 20‑841.05, require reimbursement or coverage for any prescription drug that is not included in the drug formulary or list of covered prescription drugs specified in the contract.

5. Notwithstanding section 20‑841.05, prohibit a contract from limiting or excluding coverage of a prescription drug, if the decision to limit or exclude coverage of the prescription drug is not based primarily on the coverage of prescription drugs required by this section.

6. Prohibit the use of deductibles, coinsurance, copayments or other cost sharing in relation to drug benefits and related medical benefits offered.

(more…)

New Arizona Law Helps Shield Homebuyers from Mortgage Abuses

Arizona Republic:  “New state licenses required for anyone handling a mortgage application could help prevent a repeat of the bad loans that contributed to Phoenix’s housing crash. . . . the law quietly went into affect on July 1. . . . Now, in Arizona, any person who handles a loan application or takes a borrower’s financial information will be fingerprinted and subject to a background check.”

The new law requires that all Arizona loan originators (people that make mortgage loans involving Arizona residential real estate) be licensed with the Arizona Department of Financial Institutions. The terms Arizona “loan originator,” mortgage loan” and “residential real estate” are defined in Arizona Revised Statues Section 6-991, which states:

12. “Loan originator“:

(a) Means a natural person who for compensation or gain or in the expectation of compensation or gain does any of the following:

(i) Takes a residential mortgage loan application.

(ii) Offers or negotiates terms of a residential mortgage loan.

(iii) On behalf of a borrower, negotiates with a lender or noteholder to obtain a temporary or permanent modification in an existing residential mortgage loan agreement.

(b) Does not include:

(i) An individual engaged solely as a loan processor or underwriter except as provided in section 6-991.02.

(ii) A person who only performs real estate brokerage activities and who is licensed in accordance with title 32, chapter 20, unless the person is compensated by a lender, a mortgage broker or any other loan originator or by an agent of the lender, mortgage broker or other loan originator.

(iii) A person solely involved in extensions of credit relating to a timeshare plan as defined in 11 United States Code section 101(53D).

(iv) A person who makes five or fewer mortgage loans per calendar year.

(v) A person who takes back a purchase money mortgage in connection with the sale of residential real estate.

(vi) An employer making a mortgage loan to an employee.

16.  “Mortgage loan” or “residential mortgage loan” means a loan for personal family or household use that is secured by a mortgage, deed of trust or other equivalent consensual security interest on a dwelling, as defined in the truth in lending act (15 United States Code section 1602(v)), or residential real estate on which a dwelling is constructed or intended to be constructed.

20. “Residential real estate” means any property that is located in this state and on which a dwelling is constructed or intended to be constructed.

Arizona’s newly effective loan originator licensing statutes are found here:

6-991 Definitions
6-991.01 Exemptions
6-991.02 Prohibited acts
6-991.03 Licensing; renewal; qualifications; application; fees
6-991.04 Issuance of license; notice from employing mortgage broker, mortgage banker or consumer lender; renewal; inactive status; address change; fee
6-991.05 Denial, suspension or revocation of licenses
6-991.06 Loan originator examination committee; membership
6-991.07 Examination; fee; definition
6-991.08 Reasonable efforts to secure advantageous loan for borrower
6-991.09 Mortgage recovery fund; liability limits
6-991.10 Payments to the mortgage recovery fund
6-991.11 Statute of limitations; service of summons; application for payment; insufficient monies; definition
6-991.12 Notice of claim to judgment debtor; response
6-991.13 Correction of deficiencies in the application
6-991.14 Investigation and discovery
6-991.15 Final decision and order on claim; notice
6-991.16 Claimant’s right to appeal denial of claim; service of notice of appeal; response; failure to file response
6-991.17 Superintendent’s standing in court
6-991.18 Subrogation of rights; collection
6-991.19 Waiver of rights
6-991.20 Effect of article on disciplinary action
6-991.21 Financial services fund; use of fund
6-991.22 Noncompliance not to affect validity of loan

Text of Arizona’s Concealed Weapon Law – SB 1108

Here is the actual text of Arizona Senate Bill 1108 that authorizes people over age 20 to carry a concealed weapon in Arizona without a permit.  This new law is effective from and after July 29, 2010.  Changes to existing Arizona statutes are shown in ALL CAPITAL LETTERS IN BLUE.  Deleted text is red with a line through the text.

AN ACT AMENDING SECTIONS 4-229, 13-3102, 13-3105 AND 13-3112, ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES; RELATING TO WEAPONS.

Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Arizona:

Section 1. Section 4-229, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended to read:

4-229. Licenses; handguns; posting of notice

A. A person with a permit issued pursuant to section 13-3112 or who meets the criteria specified in section 13-3102, subsection D, paragraph 1 or 2 may carry a concealed handgun on the premises of a licensee who is an on-sale retailer unless the licensee posts a sign that clearly prohibits the possession of weapons on the licensed premises. The sign shall conform to the following requirements: (more…)

Text of Prop 203 that Legalizes the Sale & Use of Medical Marijuana in Arizona

The following is the actual text of Arizona Proposition 203 that was approved by voters be on the November 2, 2010, ballot.  The law became effective on December   Arizona law NOW allows doctors to prescribe recommend marijuana to patients who suffer from conditions recognized by the law and purchase small quantities of marijuana from Arizona medical marijuana dispensaries. For a detailed explanation of the proposed law, see “Arizona Proposition 203 – Legalization of Medical Marijuana.”  Proposition 203 is based on the Marijuana Policy Project’s Model Medical Marijuana Bill.  To learn about forming and operating Arizona entities that could be used as a medical marijuana dispensary, see the Arizona LLC Law Library and the Arizona Corporation Law Library.

PROPOSITION 203
OFFICIAL TITLE
AN INITIATIVE MEASURE

AMENDING TITLE 36, ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES, BY ADDING CHAPTER 28.1; AMENDING SECTION 43-1201, ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES; RELATING TO THE MEDICAL USE OF MARIJUANA; PROVIDING FOR CONDITIONAL REPEAL.

TEXT OF PROPOSED AMENDMENT

Be it enacted by the people of the state of Arizona:

Section 1. Title.  This act may be cited as the “Arizona Medical Marijuana Act.”

Sec. 2. Findings.  The People of the State of Arizona find and declare the following: (more…)

Arizona Proposition 203 – Legalization of Medical Marijuana

On November 2, 2010, Arizona voters will vote yes or no on Proposition 203, the medical marijuana law.  If approved, Prop 203 will legalize the prescription, sale and cultivation of marijuana  in Arizona for  approved medicinal purposes.  Doctors will be able to issue prescriptions for an “allowable amount” of marijuana to a “qualifying person” who suffers from a “debilitating medical condition.”  The term “debilitating medical condition” means one or more of the following:

  • cancer, glaucoma, positive status for human immunodeficiency virus, acquired immune deficiency syndrome, hepatitis c, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, crohn’s disease, agitation of alzheimer’s disease or the treatment of these conditions.
  • a chronic or debilitating disease or medical condition or its treatment that produces one or more of the following: cachexia or wasting syndrome; severe and chronic pain; severe nausea; seizures, including those characteristic of epilepsy; or severe and persistent muscle spasms, including those characteristic of multiple sclerosis.
  • any other medical condition or its treatment added by the Arizona Department of Health Services (“DHS”).

A qualifying person is a person who has been diagnosed with a debilitating medical condition.   The allowable amount of marijuana that a qualifying person may acquire and use is:

  • 2.5 ounces of “usable marijuana,” which is defined as “the dried flowers of the marijuana plant, and any mixture or preparation thereof, but does not include the seeds, stalks and roots of the plant and does not include the weight of any non-marijuana ingredients combined with marijuana and prepared for consumption as food or drink; and
  • if the qualifying patient’s registry identification card states that the qualifying patient is authorized to cultivate marijuana, twelve marijuana plants contained in an enclosed, locked facility except that the plants are not required to be in an enclosed, locked facility if the plants are being transported because the qualifying patient is moving.  An “enclosed, locked facility” is defined as a closet, room, greenhouse or other enclosed area equipped with locks or other security devices that permit access only by a cardholder.

For patients who are not able to acquire or administer allowable amounts of marijuana, they may use the services of a “designated caregiver” which is defined as a person who:

  • is at least twenty-one years of age.
  • has agreed to assist with a patient’s medical use of marijuana.
  • has not been convicted of an excluded felony offense.
  • assists no more than five qualifying patients with the medical use of marijuana.
  • may receive reimbursement for actual costs incurred in assisting a registered qualifying patient’s medical use of marijuana if the registered designated caregiver is connected to the registered qualifying patient through the department’s registration process.  The designated caregiver may not be paid any fee or compensation for his service as a caregiver.

The amount of allowable marijuana a designated caregiver may possess, cultivate or transport for each designated patient is the same as for the designated patient.

If approved, Proposition 203 provides that within 120 days of its effective date, the Arizona Department of Health Services must promulgate rules and regulations governing nonprofit medical marijuana dispensaries, for the purpose of protecting against diversion and theft without imposing an undue burden on nonprofit medical marijuana dispensaries or compromising the confidentiality of qualifying persons and caregivers.

Proposition 203 also would allow for the creation of Arizona medical marijuana dispensaries that must be Arizona nonprofit entities.  Qualifying parties and designated caregivers who do not cultivate grow their own personal weed, will be able to buy it from a DHS approved medical marijuana dispensary.

What is an Arizona Medical Marijuana Dispensary?

Unfortunately, Proposition 203 contains some unanswered questions for people contemplating creating an Arizona medical marijuana dispensary (“MMD”).  The proposition defines “nonprofit medical marijuana dispensary” as “a not-for-profit entity that acquires, possesses, cultivates, manufactures, delivers, transfers, transports, supplies, sells or dispenses marijuana or related supplies and educational materials to cardholders.”  As an Arizona attorney who has formed over 2,600 companies, including many nonprofit corporations, I don’t know what the proposition means when it uses the term “not-for-profit entity.

Arizona statutes provide for the creation of limited partnerships, limited liability limited partnerships, general partnerships, business trusts, limited liability companies, for profit corporations and nonprofit corporations.  The term “entity” is a general term that applies to all of the previously mentioned types of business organizations.  Any of these organizations could be operated on a not-for-profit basis, but  the  corporation is the only type of nonprofit entity expressly provided for under Arizona statutory law.

Proposition 203 contains this provision:

A registered nonprofit medical marijuana dispensary shall be operated on a not-for-profit basis.  The bylaws of a registered nonprofit medical marijuana dispensary shall contain such provisions relative to the disposition of revenues and receipts to establish and maintain its nonprofit character.  A registered nonprofit medical marijuana dispensary need not be recognized as tax-exempt by the Internal Revenue Service and is not required to incorporate pursuant to Title 10, Chapter 19, Article 1.

The good news for the future owners of Arizona MMDs is that the Arizona nonprofit medical marijuana dispensary need not be an IRS approved tax-exempt organization, but this provision further muddies the waters.  What does operated on a not-for-profit basis mean?  Must the entity operate at a loss or plan its affairs so that its annual income is exactly equal to its annual expenses?  What happens if the MMD has a loss in year one and a profit in year two?  Does DHS net the profits against the losses and revoke the MMD’s license if it has a profit?  What if it has losses two out of five years?  How are profits defined?  Can the people who form the entity, officers, directors and employees be paid sufficient compensation to zero out the profits each year?  If so,could a member of the board of directors who attends a few board meetings during a year be paid $150,000 and would that payment reduce the entity’s profits?

The provision quoted above refers to Bylaws that must contain such provisions relative to the disposition of revenues and receipts to establish and maintain its nonprofit character.”  Does this language imply that the MMD must be a corporation?  In general Bylaws is a governing document used by corporations.  Other types of entities can adopt “Bylaws,” but Bylaws are not one of the governing documents used or adopted by non-corporate entities.

As an Arizona lawyer who has drafted the organizational documents for many nonprofit corporations, I don’t have a clue what Prop 203 means when it says the Bylaws must “contain such provisions relative to the disposition of revenues and receipts to establish and maintain its nonprofit character.”  The nonprofits I create do not have any such provisions, nor are these types of provisions required under Arizona’s nonprofit corporation statutes.  Hopefully the DHS will tell MMD’s what this provision means so they can modify their organizational documents to contain the required provisions.

Nor does it help that Proposition 203 says MMDs are not required to incorporate pursuant to Title 10, Chapter 19, Article 1.  The statute cited concerns only Arizona nonprofit corporations formed as cooperative marketing associations.  Chapter 19 also applies to electric cooperative nonprofit membership corporations, fraternal and benevolent societies and nonprofit electric generation and transmission cooperative corporations.  The reference to Title 10, Chapter 19, Article 1 in the language of the proposition is baffling because most Arizona nonprofit corporations are formed under other chapters of Title 10 of the Arizona Revised Statutes.  Why did the drafters cite only this one little used type of Arizona nonprofit corporation?

The $64,000 Question about MMDs

Proposition 203 creates a big problem for people who are contemplating creating an MMD?  The $64,000 question is must an Arizona MMD be created as an Arizona nonprofit corporation or can it be one of the types of entities typically formed to make a profit, but operated as a nonprofit entity?  We will not know the answer to this question until DHS gives us the answer or it approves MMDs that are not Arizona nonprofit corporations.  The answer to this question is important because of a fundamental difference between Arizona nonprofit corporations and all of the other types of entities mentioned above.  This fundamental difference is:

  • Arizona nonprofit corporations do not have owners.  This means that if the nonprofit corporation becomes valuable, there are no owners who can easily (or perhaps lawfully) put that value in their pockets.
  • Arizona limited partnerships, limited liability limited partnerships, general partnerships, business trusts, limited liability companies and for profit corporations have owners who can sell the business and keep the money.

For more see “Prop. 203: Legalization of medical marijuana” and “Text of Prop 203 that Would Legalize the Prescription and Sale of Medical Marijuana in Arizona.”

How to Hire Arizona Business Attorney Richard Keyt to Form an Arizona Nonprofit Corporation

To learn about forming and operating Arizona nonprofit corporations, see the Arizona Corporation Law Library.  To hire Arizona medical marijuana attorney Richard Keyt (aka the Arizona medical marijuana lawyer) to form an Arizona nonprofit corporation, read my articles called “How to Form an Arizona Nonprofit Corporation” and “Arizona Nonprofit Corporation Formation Service” or just complete my online Nonprofit Corporation Incorporation Questionnaire.

Text of Arizona’s Reverse Mortgage Law – SB 2242

Here is the actual text of Arizona Senate Bill 2242 that regulates reverse mortgages on Arizona real property.  The entire text below is new law.   This new law is effective from and after July 29, 2010.

Section 1. Title 6, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended by adding chapter 16, to read:

CHAPTER 16

REVERSE MORTGAGES

ARTICLE 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS

6-1601. Definitions

IN THIS CHAPTER, UNLESS THE CONTEXT OTHERWISE REQUIRES:

1. “AGREEMENT” MEANS THE DOCUMENT THAT ON EXECUTION OBLIGATES THE BORROWER AND ORIGINATOR UNDER THE REVERSE MORTGAGE.

2. “DWELLING” MEANS A RESIDENCE THAT IS DESIGNED PRINCIPALLY FOR AT LEAST ONE AND NOT MORE THAN FOUR FAMILIES IN WHICH THE BORROWER OCCUPIES AT LEAST ONE OF THE UNITS.

3. “HOUSING COUNSELING AGENCY” MEANS AN AGENCY THAT IS APPROVED BY THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT TO PROVIDE REVERSE MORTGAGE COUNSELING.

4. “ORIGINATOR” MEANS A PERSON WHO REGULARLY MAKES OR BROKERS REVERSE MORTGAGES, INCLUDING A CREDITOR OR BROKER.

5. “REVERSE MORTGAGE” MEANS A NONRECOURSE CONSUMER CREDIT OBLIGATION TO WHICH ALL OF THE FOLLOWING APPLY:

(a) A MORTGAGE, DEED OF TRUST OR EQUIVALENT CONSENSUAL SECURITY INTEREST SECURING ONE OR MORE ADVANCES IS CREATED IN THE BORROWER’S PRINCIPAL DWELLING.
(
b) ANY PRINCIPAL, INTEREST OR SHARED APPRECIATION OR EQUITY IS DUE AND PAYABLE ONLY AFTER THE BORROWER DIES, THE DWELLING IS TRANSFERRED OR THE BORROWER CEASES TO OCCUPY THE DWELLING AS A PRINCIPAL DWELLING. THIS SUBDIVISION DOES NOT APPLY IN THE CASE OF DEFAULT.
(
c) CASH ADVANCES MAY BE PROVIDED TO A BORROWER:

(i) BASED ON THE EQUITY OR THE VALUE IN THE BORROWER’S OWNER OCCUPIED PRINCIPAL RESIDENCE.
(ii) IF LOAN PROCEEDS ARE USED BY THE BORROWER TO PURCHASE THE BORROWER’S DWELLING THAT SECURES THE REVERSE MORTGAGE.

(d) THE CONSUMER CREDIT OBLIGATION IS NOT A HOME EQUITY CONVERSION MORTGAGE INSURED BY THE FEDERAL HOUSING AUTHORITY. (more…)

Annotated Full Text of Arizona Immigration Law – SB 1070

Professor Gabriel “Jack” Chin of the University of Arizona School of Law has prepare an annotated version of the full text of Arizona’s immigration law, SB 1070.  the full text of SB 1070,  The complete text of Senate Bill 1070 prepared by Professor Chin has been published by the Arizona Republic.  Here are links to the highlights:
  • Background points
  • Who can get sued for what?
  • What Does the Law Require of Law Enforcement?
  • What uses of race do the U.S. and Arizona Constitutions permit and prohibit?
  • Alerting officials
  • What do the federal violations references consist of?
  • What is the interaction with freepseech and other rights?
  • Does this law make it a crime to be illegal on its face?

Actual Text of Arizona’s Fireworks Law – House Bill 2246

Here is the actual text of Arizona House Bill 2246 that allows Arizonans to sell, buy and use fireworks.  Text that is in BLUE AND ALL CAPITALIZED is new text added by HB 2246 to existing Arizona statutes.  Text that is in red and lined out is text of current law that is deleted by the new law.  This new law is effective from and after November 30, 2010.

The intent of the law appears to allow people to buy and use personal fun type fireworks, not explosive or rocket type fireworks.  Note this provision in the new law:

PERMISSIBLE CONSUMER FIREWORKS: . . . DOES NOT INCLUDE ANYTHING THAT IS DESIGNED OR INTENDED TO RISE INTO THE AIR AND EXPLODE OR TO DETONATE IN THE AIR OR TO FLY ABOVE THE GROUND, INCLUDING, FOR EXAMPLE, FIREWORK ITEMS COMMONLY KNOWN AS BOTTLE ROCKETS, SKY ROCKETS, MISSILE-TYPE ROCKETS, HELICOPTERS, TORPEDOES, ROMAN CANDLES AND JUMPING JACKS.

Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Arizona:

Section 1. Section 36-1601, Arizona Revised Statutes, is amended to read:

36-1601. Definitions

In this article, unless the context otherwise requires:

1. “CONSUMER FIREWORK” MEANS SMALL FIREWORK DEVICES THAT CONTAIN RESTRICTED AMOUNTS OF PYROTECHNIC COMPOSITION DESIGNED PRIMARILY TO PRODUCE VISIBLE OR AUDIBLE EFFECTS BY COMBUSTION AND THAT COMPLY WITH THE CONSTRUCTION, CHEMICAL COMPOSITION AND LABELING REGULATIONS PRESCRIBED IN 49 CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS PART 172 AND 173, REGULATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION AS PRESCRIBED IN 16 CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS PARTS 1500 AND 1507 AND THE AMERICAN PYROTECHNICS ASSOCIATION STANDARD 87-1, STANDARD FOR CONSTRUCTION AND APPROVAL FOR TRANSPORTATION OF FIREWORKS, NOVELTIES AND THEATRICAL PYROTECHNICS, DECEMBER 1, 2001 VERSION. (more…)