House approves 2025 budget and broad package of bills after late-night votes

The Arizona House of Representatives passed the 2025 General Appropriations Act (SB 17 35) and a package of related budget and policy bills in late‑night votes on June 26, 2025, advancing the measures to the Senate.

The main budget bill, SB 17 35, was approved by the House on third reading by a recorded vote of 40 ayes to 16 nays. Dozens of other Senate bills and concurrent resolutions tied to the fiscal year 2025‑26 budget also passed the House on third reading, generally by similar margins; a few measures failed on close votes. The session included focused floor debate on funding for immigration enforcement, school vouchers, higher education and other items before the House adopted the package and recessed until the next day to allow final Senate action.

Why it matters: the General Appropriations Act sets state spending levels for fiscal year 2025‑26 and determines funding for schools, health care, law enforcement and other state programs. Several contested provisions recorded in the transcript — including roughly $24 million of enforcement‑related spending referenced during debate and continuing support for the expanded Empowerment Scholarship Account voucher program — shaped lawmakers’ final votes.

What the House did (high‑level) - Passed SB 17 35, the General Appropriations Act, on third reading (40‑16). - Advanced a package of related bills (SB 17 36–50 and companion measures) and two school district expenditure resolutions (SCR 10‑41 and SCR 10‑42) to third reading; most were approved on third reading by the House and transmitted to the Senate. - Passed a separate measure, Senate Bill 1,500, concerning compensation for wrongful convictions, by 55 ayes to 1 nay. - Failed a handful of measures or amendments on close roll calls, including Senate Bill 14,70 (a revenue/appropriation reduction affecting AHCCCS) and SCR 10‑02 (a proposed constitutional referral on photo‑enforcement), each of which did not reach the needed majority.

Major themes from floor debate - Immigration enforcement funding: Several Democrats said they could not support the overall budget because it includes language authorizing state funds for immigration enforcement activities and for assistance to local law enforcement on immigration matters. Representative Alma Hernandez said, “my morals and my values cannot allow me to support the terrorizing of my community,” and cast a no vote. Representative Consuelo Hernandez and others expressed similar concerns about the effect of enforcement language on immigrant families in their districts.

- School vouchers and K‑12 funding: Opponents criticized the expansion and ongoing funding for the statewide ESA (Empowerment Scholarship Account) program. Representative Sandoval said roughly $1 billion has already been allocated to the universal voucher program and urged larger restorations for public K‑12 schools in rural and low‑income areas. Supporters pointed to increases in total education funds in the package.

- Higher education, tuition and residency rules: Several floor amendments and roll‑call attempts focused on whether public universities could subsidize tuition for people not lawfully present and on reimbursement rules for longstanding private institutions participating in teacher‑training programs; those amendments were debated and in some cases rejected on roll call.

- Oversight and corrections: Lawmakers discussed measures to create additional oversight mechanisms for corrections and related state agencies; some members supported new oversight tools while others raised concerns about structure and independence.

Votes at a glance (selected final third‑reading outcomes recorded in the House journal) - SB 17 35 (General Appropriations Act): passed, 40 ayes, 16 nays. - SB 17 36 (amusements/appropriations item): passed, 40 ayes, 16 nays. - SB 17 37 (capital outlay appropriations): passed, 40 ayes, 16 nays. - SB 17 38 (commerce): passed, 40 ayes, 16 nays. - SB 17 39 (criminal justice): passed, 40 ayes, 16 nays. - SB 17 40 (environment): passed, 41 ayes, 15 nays. - SB 17 41 (health care): passed, 43 ayes, 13 nays. - SB 17 42 (higher education): passed, 42 ayes, 14 nays. - SB 17 43 (human services): passed, 42 ayes, 14 nays. - SB 17 44 (K‑12 education): passed, 42 ayes, 14 nays. - SB 17 45 (local government appropriations): passed, 41 ayes, 15 nays. - SB 17 46 (management of state property): passed, 40 ayes, 16 nays. - SB 17 47 (revenue): passed, 40 ayes, 16 nays. - SB 17 48 (budget implementation): passed, 40 ayes, 16 nays. - SB 17 49 (taxation omnibus): passed, 40 ayes, 16 nays. - SB 17 50 (transportation): passed, 42 ayes, 14 nays. - SCR 10‑41 (school district expenditure limitation authorization): passed, 44 ayes, 12 nays. - SCR 10‑42 (school district expenditure limitation authorization): passed, 44 ayes, 12 nays. - HB 2946 (citywide special election authority): passed, 40 ayes, 16 nays. - SB 1161 (sheriffs/constables measure requiring a 2/3 vote to enact as effective): passed, 48 ayes, 8 nays (required threshold met). - SB 14‑70 (appropriation reductions to AHCCCS): failed on third reading (29 ayes, 27 nays); did not pass. - SCR 10‑02 (photo enforcement constitutional referral): failed (29 ayes, 27 nays); did not pass. - SB 1,500 (wrongful convictions compensation and related changes): passed, 55 ayes, 1 nay.

What was unresolved or narrowly decided - A number of floor amendments were offered and voted on during committee‑of‑the‑whole consideration; several roll‑call challenges sought to amend committee reports and to add speaker‑filed amendments but did not prevail. A number of individual policy changes failed on close roll calls; the transcript records multiple roll‑call requests and appeals under house rules.

Context and next steps - The House recessed after the votes and appointed a small committee to notify the Senate that the House had completed its work and was ready to adjourn sine die. The Senate is expected to complete its remaining actions and return any amendments or transmitted bills. Final enactment requires the Senate’s concurrence and the governor’s signature or veto.

The transcript: the late‑night session included dozens of short remarks by members both supporting and opposing individual line items; public spectators (youth groups) attended earlier in the day. Several lawmakers used their explanation‑of‑vote periods to register district‑level concerns about ESAs, immigration enforcement language, and tribal and rural funding needs.