Arizona Senate Bill SB1161

Arizona 2025 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/27/25
• Report Pass: 2/5/25
• Report Pass: 2/10/25
• Engrossed: 2/27/25
• Report Pass: 3/17/25
• Report Pass: 4/14/25
• Enrolled: 6/27/25
• Passed: 7/1/25
• Chaptered: 7/1/25

Caption

Sheriffs; constables; service; mileage; fees

Summary

SB1161 amends Arizona law governing fees charged by sheriffs and constables in civil actions. The bill largely restates and updates the fee schedule for serving process, summoning witnesses, levying and returning writs, executing writs of possession or restitution, garnishment service, affidavits of service, mileage, and related disbursements. It also preserves existing exceptions, including no fee for certain protective-order service tied to domestic violence or sexual violence, and it keeps the special fee for justice court writs deposited into the constable ethics standards and training fund. The bill also adds or clarifies administrative requirements for constables. Constables must maintain a standardized daily activity log listing service attempts, case information, parties, addresses where allowed, dates, and mileage, and that log is a public record that must be available at the constable’s office and filed monthly with the board of supervisors. In large counties with more than three million residents, the bill creates a special mileage-calculation rule when a justice of the peace office is located outside precinct boundaries, requiring a certified mileage adjustment to be used for fee calculations.

Impact

SB1161 amends A.R.S. § 11-445, which controls the fees sheriffs and constables may charge in civil process matters. It affects fee collection practices, mileage calculations, and recordkeeping obligations for county law-enforcement process servers, while also affecting litigants, judgment creditors, and parties requesting civil service or execution of writs. The bill also reinforces public access to constable activity logs and ties certain writ-fee revenue to the constable ethics standards and training fund.

Sentiment

The bill appears to have been generally supported throughout the legislative process. It passed the Senate Public Safety Committee unanimously, advanced through Senate Rules, and received strong majority votes on third reading in both chambers. House committee and floor votes also show clear support, though not unanimous, indicating broad agreement on the need to update sheriff and constable fee rules and reporting requirements.

Contention

The main points of potential contention are the fee increases/fee structure for civil process services, the mileage reimbursement rules, and the added transparency and reporting requirements for constables. The special mileage formula for counties with populations over three million suggests the bill was designed to address a local administrative issue, likely affecting Maricopa County, and could have raised concerns about fairness or implementation. The public-record daily log requirement may also have been sensitive because it requires disclosure of service activity and certain address information, although the bill limits disclosure where otherwise precluded by law.