Dedication
Twenty-five years ago, Marvin and June Morrison had an idea. Arizona would be better able to deal with the myriad challenges that accompany rapid growth if an objective r e s e a r c h organization were available to help state leaders make good public policy choices. The Morrisons' generosity enabled Arizona State University to establish just such a resource -- Arizona's first "think tank" -- named Morrison Institute for Public Policy. Marvin, June, their sons, and other family members already had a substantial record of public service in their hometown of Gilbert and throughout the state when they made Morrison Institute a gift to all Arizonans, present and future. Since its inception in 1982, Morrison Institute for Public Policy has produced hundreds of research studies and provided policy advice to leaders and residents nearly everywhere in Arizona. This report, Arizona Ideas, was possible, in part, because of the Institute's long institutional memory and continuous interaction with state and local policy makers. I t seems a fitting tribute, t h e r e f o r e, t h a t a report that recognizes Arizona's efforts t o make the state more livable, a t t r a c t i v e, a n d competitive would be dedicated to M a r v i n and June Morrison, w h o knew Arizona had this creative spirit all along.
ARIZONA IDEAS
Po l i c i e s from A-Z f o r a Livable and Competitive State
A
Z
Research Team
W i t h Assistance From
P u b l i c a t i o n Coordinator
Richard Toon, Ph.D., Project Director Rob Melnick, Ph.D. Grady Gammage, Jr. Nancy Welch David Berman Bill Hart Rick Heffernon Erica Rosenberg, J.D.
Nora Coronado Daniel Hunting Andrew Levi Eugene Slechta Suzanne Ernstein Nielle McCammon Dennis Mitchell Asadeh Osanloo Cherylene Schick Alice Willey
Karen Leland
P u b l i c a t i o n Design
Karen C. Heard, Chalk Design Th e assistance of those who provided f e e d b a c k on these and other ideas and i n s i g h t s into the development of this p u b l i c a t i o n is acknowledged gratefully.
C o p y r i g h t �2006 by the Arizona Board of Regents for and on behalf of Arizona State University and its Morrison Institute for Public Policy.
M O R R I S O N INSTITUTE FOR PUBLIC POLICY / SCHOOL OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS / COLLEGE OF PUBLIC PROGRAMS / ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY
TABLE OF CONTENTS
F o re w o rd by Governor Janet Napolitano. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 I D E A S AND PUBLIC POLICIES FOR LIVABILITY AND COMPETITIVENESS . . . . 8 A A H C C C S to Health Care . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Health care for the poor nearly bankrupted Arizona's counties. The Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System provided a solution.
B
B a s i c to Arizona: Salt River Project and Central Arizona Project . . . . . . 12
The private and public efforts that created the Salt River Project and the Central Arizona Project marked the beginning and the end of 20th century America's commitment to vast investments in large-scale water projects.
C
C i t i z e n - L e d Government . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Arizona's constitution was crafted to maximize the power of ordinary citizens.
D D a r k Skies over Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Dark skies make for fine star gazing and competitiveness in multimillion dollar industries.
E
E d u c a t i o n Standards and Accountability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
K-12 academic achievement standards give clear direction for learning, teaching, and testing. Arizona's accountability system lets everyone know how much students are achieving.
F
F o re s t Health . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Responding to threats from wildfire, disease, and insects, Arizonans have launched statewide initiatives to reduce fire danger, preserve forest health, and enable people to better co-exist with nature.
G
G ro u n d w a t e r Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
The 1980 Groundwater Management Act settled some water disputes, preserved a precious resource, and shaped Arizona's modern pattern of urban development.
H H e r i t a g e Fund . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Arizona's rich heritage features a unique combination of natural wonders, a long human history, and a dramatic blend of cultures. In creating the Arizona Heritage Fund, residents showed their commitment to a broad perspective on conservation and preservation.
I
I n t e g r a t i o n of Public Agencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
The Arizona Department of Economic Security and Tucson's TREO illustrate a long-time commitment to streamlined public services.
J
J u r y Reform . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
A r i z o n a 's jury reforms further empower jurors and reinforce the state' commitment to an informed, a c t i v e citizenry.
K K n o w l e d g e Economy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
Making Arizona a stronger player in the global knowledge economy will benefit the entire state. Over time, many ideas have supported innovation and talent.
L
L i t e r a c y for Families . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
When parents and young children read together, much more is learned than the ABCs.
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: POLICY ISSUES, IDEAS AND PRODUCTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
4
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
M M a s t e r Planned Communities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
S o m e of the nation's earliest master planned communities are in Arizona. R e a d y - m a d e, f u l l - s e r v i c e communities have given certainty to planners and residents alike.
N N o n - P a r t i s a n Local Government. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
Arizonans' support for the council-manager form of city government reflects a no-nonsense approach that seeks to reward merit and focus on people rather than politics.
O O u t There with Arts and Culture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
By design, Arizonans are increasingly taking advantage of arts and culture's unique contributions to tourism, education, and communities' sense of place.
P
P l a n n i n g for Economic Growth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
Arizona's business and government leaders joined forces to forge a statewide strategic plan that left a legacy of public-private cooperation for economic development.
Q Q u i e t Roads . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
Technology allows old tires to be recycled for freeway and highway paving that also smoothes the way for more peaceful neighborhoods and lower road maintenance costs.
R S T U
R i v e r s in the Desert . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
Public policies point to the re-valuing of Arizona's waterways after a century of development.
S c h o o l Choice. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
Charter schools are the centerpiece of Arizona's polices for supporting education choices for students.
Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n for a Region . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
Fueled by the public's calls for action, leaders cooperated on a regional transportation plan.
U n i v e r s i t y Science and Technology Investments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
With the passage of Proposition 301, Arizonans said "yes" to investments in science and technology research as a springboard to an increasingly competitive knowledge economy.
V
Ve r y Important Chips . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
Semiconductors and their forerunners have played a major part in the creation of "high tech" sectors in Arizona's economy. In turn, public policies helped create an environment friendly to technology.
W Wa l k on the Arizona Trail . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
An Arizona hiker's dream is close to becoming an 800-mile reality, as public and private organizations and volunteers construct the Utah-to-Mexico Arizona Trail.
X X e r i s c a p e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
Backed by city ordinances and municipal associations, xeriscaping is widely promoted and often required in Arizona, resulting in water-wise stewardship that works to reduce consumption and celebrate the desert environment.
Y
Yo u r s , Mine, and Ours: Regional Economic Development . . . . . . . . . . . 60
Regional economic development organizations work to replace competition with cooperation to attract new firms.
Z
Z e a l for State Trust Land . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
Arizona has held on to most of the state trust land awarded it at statehood. The millions of acres still available remain a valuable resource for the state.
T H E BABY STATE'S SELF IMAGE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 S e l e c t e d Data Sources and References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
5
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
6
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
FOREWORD
Arizona Ideas does us all a great service. I t makes us stop our whirlwind of daily a c t i v i t y to appreciate once again the power of ideas as the basis for public policy. Arizona Ideas tells us a lot about our past, explains some of our present, and pushes us to continue to plan for the future. Many other publications -- including several by Morrison Institute for Public Policy -- have contributed to Arizona's development by comparing our state to others. Arizona Ideas is different. It tells about the state on its own terms in a novel way. This volume highlights how innovation and new ideas have made the state a better, more livable, and more competitive place than it might have been. E a r l y childhood scholar Loris Malaguzzi has written extensively about the roots of creativity. He noted that "creativity seems to emerge from multiple experiences... including a sense of freedom to venture beyond the known." This publication brings together ideas that stem from a potent combination of broad experiences, strong personalities, and willingness to go beyond the tried and true. Many have stood the test of time. Others have provided a platform without which we would not be where we are today. Still others are works in progress. Public policy is a process, and any process must start with an idea. I urge you to read Arizona Ideas to learn more about our state and reconfirm the power of ideas to help us envision and create a bright future for all Arizonans.
Janet Napolitano Governor, State of Arizona
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
7
ARIZONA IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
IDEAS AND PUBLIC POLICIES FOR LIVABILITY AND COMPETITIVENESS
Throughout history, ideas and innovations have been as important to the quality of places as they have been to the development of new inventions and modern economies. From the Roman aqueducts to 18th century governing bodies to institutions that teach workers 21st century skills, places benefit when public leaders are creative.
Business circles are abuzz these days with cries for more innovation because CEOs say it is what will keep the U.S. on top in the global economy. Just as creative activities can enhance a company's profitability, a state or region will be more competitive as it becomes a more desirable place to live and work. In short, innovations in public policy can improve quality of place and competitiveness at the same time. Arizonans could cite many public policies that arguably have made a positive difference in the state. In an A-Z format, this publication highlights a wide variety of ideas that have served the state in one way or another. T h i s is not to say that the 26 discussed here were perfectly implemented or are without flaws. Each of the f o l l o w i n g entries is ripe for a "yes, b u t ... " r e s p o n s e b e c a u s e of ongoing debates about many of them, t h e continuing negative status in various areas, or memories of how conflicting views and politics scuttled even better ideas. The entries here often represent just a first step o n the rough road to achieving the entire outcome d e s i r e d by Arizonans. I n addition, p u b l i c issues have b e c o m e more complex, w h i l e residents' and leaders' i n t e r e s t s have splintered -- and been affected by a highly partisan environment. In How Arizona Compares: Real Numbers and Hot Topics, Morrison Institute for Public Policy noted that Arizona was "just fair" when compared with other states across ten policy areas. Arizona Ideas offers readers another look at Arizona -- one in which creativity shines through. This publication is a highly unusual -- some would say risky -- take on public policy. It invites readers to focus on ideas that have increased the state's livability or are likely to in the future.
T h e New Importance of Livability
Livability is a concept that is increasingly discussed in public policy circles. It has a larger context than the more common term, "quality of life," although the two concepts certainly intersect. Quality of life typically invokes a more personal interpretation: How does this issue affect the quality of my life? Is my community safe? Is the air I breathe clean? Do I get good public services? Livability, o n the other hand, i s broader and less personal, b u t m o r e tied to place: D o e s a locale (neighborhood, c i t y, m e t r o p o l i t a n region, o r state) have the fundamental ingredients for people, as a whole, to prosper? Multifaceted and wide screen, livability is what scholar D o w e l l Myers calls, " a n ensemble concept." L i va b i l i t y embodies the many tangible and intangible inputs that shape residents' day-to-day existence. Livability takes into account what gives a place distinction, what is w o r t h protecting, a n d what needs improving. M o s t important, perhaps, is that a place's livability is affected directly by public policy decisions. Vast amounts of academic literature and popular reports in disciplines ranging from architecture and economics
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
8
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
to planning and public affairs describe livability, quality of place, quality of life, and their variants. Arizona Ideas starts where many of those reports leave off. This publication illustrates how ideas on many subjects contribute to livability and how they turn into public policy initiatives. Arizona Ideas presents instances when innovation, and, occasionally, downright stubbornness, served to address complex public problems. In the aggregate, the report demonstrates that the public policy process, so derided a t times, c a n and has produced outcomes that have improved Arizona's livability.
development, yet it also exemplifies how cooperation directly benefits people's livelihoods and, at the same time, helps pay for vital public services. "Out There with Arts and Culture" notes the links arts and culture have with both tourism and community development -- that highlight a sense of place and enhance quality of life. The connections among the policies highlighted in this report are endless and diverse. What the A-Z ideas share is their contribution to Arizona's livability and its competitiveness. A s such, t h e y help Arizona's residents and businesses reach their goals.
F ro m Livability to Competitiveness
Arizona Ideas includes notions large and small, homegrown and borrowed, current and historical. From A-Z, e v e r y one -- whether originally born here or adapted f r o m elsewhere -- contributes to the state's c o m p e t i t i v e position.
Looking at an Arizona Idiosyncrasy
Arizona Ideas also explores the roots of Arizona's tradition of self-criticism -- some call it a sense of insecurity or inferiority in comparison to other places -- that often s u r f a c e s in discussions of public policy. T h i s observation has provoked considerable debate, b u t few would deny that this perspective e x i s t s. I t is time to debate this idiosyncrasy o u t in the open and find better ways of moving the state ahead.
L i va b i l i t y and competitiveness are complex concepts. And the policies that enhance them are interrelated. For example, "Very Important C h i p s " d e s c r i b e s the start of the state's high tech focus more than 50 years ago. The seeds for Good ideas are easier to talk about than to implemany of today's most competitive industries were ment. For the 26 selected for this report, Arizona's planted during World War II. However, they would leaders and residents worked through the tumulnot have borne the semiconductor fruit they have if tuous public policy making process and achieved Arizona had not also acted to ensure an adequate something of lasting value. The entries tell stories of water supply for manufacturing operations. Similarly, on efforts to act in the public interest, of political processes face value, one might think that Arizona's "Dark Skies" that turned policy choices into public programs, of people p o l i c y, w h i c h seeks to determined to innovate, r e d u c e the impact of and of myriad ways to H o w the A-Z Ideas Were Selected o u t d o o r lighting, w a s make a place better. e s t a b l i s h e d only to proMorrison Institute for Public Policy set out to look at the state t e c t the environment. I n Th e national organizain terms of its ideas, instead of issues, comparisons, or problems. f a c t , t h i s idea helped t i o n Partners for Livable To begin, a broad review of policies, programs, and choices over the state's history was done to produce a long list of interesting b u i l d astronomy instituC o m m u n i t i e s says that ideas. Then, each was rated according to two criteria. tions that, in turn, l i v a b i l i t y essentially is � Had the public policy or set of policies affected spawned Arizona's highly t h e "equitable distribumany people in Arizona or the entire state? competitive optics industion of the good life." In � Was the idea original to Arizona or specifically or significantly adapted to our circumstances? t r y . " Yo u r s , M i n e , a n d public policy circles, the Considering the numerous possibilities, this publication could Ours" describes an innogood life, livability, and h a v e gone from A-Z far more than once. T h e 26 covered in v a t i v e policy approach competitiveness can and Arizona Ideas then are simply examples of notions that have t o regional economic should be synonymous. become or inspired public policy over time.
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
9
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
AHCCCS TO HEALTH CARE
H e a l t h care for the poor nearly bankrupted Arizona's counties. The Arizona Health Care Cost C o n t a i n m e n t System provided a solution.
A
President Lyndon Baines Johnson signed Medicaid into law in 1965, creating a state-federal health care program for low income Americans. But Arizona declined to sign on and continued its county-based system of indigent health care. State leaders avoided the national program primarily because of concerns about high costs and big bureaucracies. By 1972, Arizona was the only state in the nation not participating in Medicaid. Ironically, it was the high cost of the county programs that finally forced Arizona's policy makers to face the need for change. In 1975, Arizona's then-14 counties spent $59 million on health care services for poor residents. By 1980, the figure had ballooned to $123 million -- with costs projected to
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
10
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
be $250 million by 1985. Joining Medicaid would offer s o m e solutions, b u t Arizona's traditional disdain for large-scale federal programs made it difficult for leaders to agree on a program that could deliver the required s e r v i c e s and control costs. Fi n a l l y, a new competitive " m a n a g e d care" a p p r o a c h emerged. A s described by A r i z o n a State University professor John Stuart Hall, " Th e development of the Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System (AHCCCS) was the byproduct of a strongly held belief by the leadership in the state legislature and the governor that to accomplish both cost containment and quality care in an indigent health care p r o g r a m , i t was necessary to create a public/private partnership to administer a pre-paid, capitated system." As a result, AHCCCS "mainstreamed" Medicaid recipients into private medical practices instead of providing services through public agencies; low income consumers got health care choices as well as services, and Arizona got lower costs compared to other states. The AHCCCS of 2006 is quite different from that of 1982, b u t it still contracts with private health plans, p a y i n g t h e m a fixed amount for each person covered. N o w t a k i n g full advantage of national resources, f e d e r a l d o l l a r s covered 69% of Arizona's n e a r l y $4.4 b i l l i o n total expend i t u r e s in 2005. A H C C C S also uses state and county dollars, plus s o m e revenue from the state tax o n tobacco products. A H C C C S ' s e r v i c e s and eligibility have also e x p a n d e d over time to serve a va r i e t y of needs unmet by the o r i g i n a l program. I n 1995, a
AHCCCS PROGRAMS A c u t e Care K i d s C a re A r i z o n a Long Term C a r e System M e d i c a r e Cost S h a r i n g * * and other To t a l * July 2005.
ENROLLMENT*
EXPENDITURES (MILLIONS)
1,004,953 50,638 41,051 24,845 1,121,487
$3,372.0 $75.1 $852.3 $68.5 $4,368.8
** Working adults without health insurance.
Source: AHCCCS, August 2005.
phase-in of behavioral health services began. In 1998, " K i d s C a r e " ( f o r m a l l y the State Children's Health I n s u r a n c e Program) was included. I n 2000, A r i z o n a v o t e r s earmarked tobacco settlement funds to expand a d u l t eligibility levels to 100% of the federal poverty l e v e l . I n 2003, p a r e n t s of KidsCare recipients became eligible for coverage. Some AHCCCS programs now serve s m a l l businesses and working adults who cannot a f f o r d health insurance. W h i l e AHCCCS still does not go far enough for many h e a l t h care advocates, i t remains a model for public/ p r i v a t e managed care, c o s t i n g about 15% l e s s t h a n t h e n a t i o n a l a v e r a g e. C o m p a r a t i v e reports from The N e l s o n A. R o c ke f e l l e r Institute of Government at the State University o f New York, A l b a n y have called A H C C C S the "gold standard" i n public health care services. All this b e c a u s e as one Phoenix physician p u t it, " We were so far behind we g o t ahead."
P O L I C Y ISSUES AHCCCS
P O L I C Y IDEAS
P O L I C Y PRODUCTS
Indigent health care put counties in fiscal crisis Balance between health care cost and quality
Managed care Competition among providers
Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
11
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
BASIC TO ARIZONA:
SALT RIVER PROJECT AND CENTRAL ARIZONA PROJECT
T h e private and public efforts that created the Salt River Project and the Central Arizona Project marked the beginning and the end of 20th century America's commitment to vast investments in large-scale water projects.
B
The development of Salt River Project and the Central Arizona Project serve as prime examples of the successes of engineering and government enterprise in the 20th c e n t u r y. Th e s e two massive water projects, i c o n s of w e s t e r n growth and development, d i d more than reclaim the desert for human settlement. Because Salt River Project (SRP) and Central Arizona Project (CAP) required civic single-mindedness to turn the vision of reliable water supplies into reality, their activities also shaped Arizona's economy and political culture.
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
12
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
The innovations are evident in everything from new road construction techniques (imagine building the Apache Trail to the Roosevelt Dam site in 1903) to technology for pushing water uphill through the 336 miles of the CAP canal. In turn, government dollars and organization r e p l a c e d failed private efforts to build irrigation and water storage systems. The western reclamation projects o f the first half of the 20th century would have been impossible without the addition of federal dollars and programs to the stick-to-itiveness of local boosters. S R P, f o r example, i s a hybrid public-private entity -- a state political subdivision that provides electricity and a private corporation that supplies water. Roosevelt Dam was the first m u l t i - u s e water project: H y d r o generated electricity helped build a dam to control flooding and supply i r r i g a t i o n . S a l e s of the new energy r e s o u r c e accelerated repayment o f the federal construction loan a n d supported the development of A r i z o n a 's economy. Wa t e r and elect r i c i t y have made SRP a "power h o u s e " i n more ways than one. I t c u r r e n t l y supplies electricity to a p p r o x i m a t e l y 860,000 customers and is the largest water supplier in metro Phoenix.
In 1993, completion of CAP marked the fulfillment of decades of dreams. Colorado River water delivered by CAP provides approximately a fifth of the state's total water needs -- specifically in Maricopa, Pinal, and Pima counties. It also supplies the resources to settle decades of water wrangling between the state and Native American tribes. Getting CAP done required years of concerted lobbying on Capitol Hill and several trips to the U.S. Supreme Court. Congressional authorization in 1968, led by Senator Carl Hayden and Representatives John Rhodes and Morris Udall and supported by all of Arizona's delegation, marked the zenith of the state's legendary clout in Congress. SRP and CAP bookend a never-to-ber e p e a t e d era of federal endeavor. Roosevelt Dam is the first of the water projects that could be said to have "won the West," while Central Arizona Project stands out as the l a s t effort of that kind. A r i z o n a n s w i l l always pay close attention to wa t e r. S R P and CAP are two of the m o s t visible and historic parts of A r i z o n a 's water portfolio.
Photo Credit: Arizona Historical Society, AHS.0478.00026.
P O L I C Y ISSUES B a s i c to Arizona: Salt River Project and Central Arizona Project
P O L I C Y IDEAS
P O L I C Y PRODUCTS
Stable, secure water supplies for growth and development
Large-scale "reclamation" projects to store and deliver water
Salt River Project Central Arizona Project
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
13
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
CITIZEN-LED GOVERNMENT
Arizona's constitution was crafted to maximize the power of ordinary citizens.
C
Carl Hayden, campaigning in 1911 for a seat in Congress, noted Arizonans' eagerness to shape their new state government. "The people want their own kind of government," Hayden, who went on to serve in Congress for 60 years, told reporters. "They want to be the dictators." They worked to make it so. Arizona's constitution, adopted i n 1911, r e f l e c t e d the Progressive Movement's belief in citizen empowerment and mechanisms for keeping government close to the people. The resulting devices include the initiative, referendum, and recall, the election of many administrative officials, and the limiting of various elected official terms to two years. Arizona also decided on a part-time "citizen legislature." Initiatives allow citizens to use petitions to make their own laws or amend the constitution, effectively bypassing their elected representatives. Referenda let citizens reject laws passed by the legislature. The legislature may also "refer" items to the ballot. Recalls enable voters to force an elected official either to resign or stand for a special election. Early leaders expected the referendum and recall to help citizens get rid of bad laws or bad lawmakers an d the initiative to help maneuver around elected officials who refused to act in the public interest. The constitution even specified that local governments also must honor initiatives and referenda.
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
14
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
Initiatives and referenda have been popular in Arizona, p a r t i c u l a r l y in recent years. D u r i n g the 1990s alone, g r o u p s organized 155 statewide initiatives, o f which 20% made it to the ballot. Of these, 13 passed, including the Clean Elections Act of 1998. Other successful ballot m e a s u r e s include Proposition 301 (2000), w h i c h increased state sales taxes to fund public education; and Proposition 303 (2002), which expanded the number of working poor eligible for the Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System. Since adopting the constitution, the state has made other moves in pursuit of "empowering the people." Arizona endorsed suffrage for women early o n , a l t h o u g h the state was slow to protect the rights of minority voters. Indeed, the right of Native American Arizonans to vote in the state was not affirmed by the Arizona Supreme Court until 1948. In 1992, long before a federal law emerged on the issue, A r i z o n a voters approved "motor voter" registration, allowing citizens to sign up to vote while acquiring or renewing driver's licenses. That same y e a r, v o t e r s limited the number of terms legislators could serve in office, with the hope, in part, of increasing c o m p e t i t i o n for House and Senate s e a t s . A r i z o n a also implemented vote-by-mail and early-voting systems
in the 1990s to increase convenience and accessibility. In 1998, voters adopted a "semi-open" primary system to allow independent voters to cast ballots in the partisan primary of their choice. That same year, the Arizona Clean E l e c t i o n s Act initiative passed, w h i c h set up a public campaign-financing system. The measure was intended to increase participation in the electoral process, reduce the influence of special interests, and expand competition among candidates. Clean Elections, however, have been challenged in court by some opponents for its funding m e c h a n i s m s and questioned in other quarters for its f a i l u r e s. I t has not, f o r example, t u r n e d the tide on Arizona's record of low voter turnout or met expectations o n increasing competition. S o m e commentators say that Clean Elections h a s done little to encourage voters, c a n d i d a t e s, a n d a broad spectrum o f both. Th e direct democracy tools, h a v e b e e n controversial -- for example P r o p o s i t i o n 200 in 2004 requiring proof of citizenship for voting has been divisive -- and they have been used in ways early leaders would not have approved. Yet, a look at the past s h o w s that Arizona's early leaders wanted citizens to lead as well.
Photo Credit: Arizona Department of Library, Archives, and Public Records.
P O L I C Y ISSUES Citizen-Led Gover nment
P O L I C Y IDEAS
P O L I C Y PRODUCTS
Prevention of special interest influence on government Citizen-controlled government
Direct democracy Short terms for most officials Frequent elections Citizen empowerment Convenience for citizens
Referendum, initiative, and recall "Clean Elections" Early voting/vote by mail Motor voter registration
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
15
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
DARK SKIES OVER ARIZONA
D a r k skies make for fine stargazing and competitiveness in multimillion dollar industries.
D
Fo r millennia, o u r ancestors navigated the night by f o l l o w i n g the bright stars and planets. To d a y, m a n y people can barely find a star because of glare from bigc i t y lights. A r i z o n a , h o w e v e r, s t i l l possesses a healthy m e a s u r e of dark skies thanks in large part to the s t a t e 's long-time devotion to astronomy and a recent d e s i r e to protect darkness as a competitive asset. To p r e s e r v e its appeal to astronomers, p o l i c i e s to reduce l i g h t pollution have been implemented throughout A r i z o n a . Th e state legislature, a l l 15 counties, a n d 31 c i t i e s have enacted outdoor lighting codes. I n addit i o n , Tu c s o n is home to the International Dark-Sky A s s o c i a t i o n (IDA), a n organization of astronomers and stargazing enthusiasts whose mission is to help preserve d a r k skies throughout the world. The modern scientific and economic interest in astronomy in Arizona began in 19th-century Flagstaff. Astronomer Percival Lowell settled there after journeying west from h i s Boston home in search of a place suitable for an o b s e r va t o r y to study Mars. I n 1894, h e built Arizona's first observatory on what is now known as "Mars Hill." Th e Lowell Observatory, s t i l l operating today, g a i n e d
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
16
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
The Arizona optics industry today includes more than 180 c o m p a n i e s and contributes some $650 million to the state's economy. Dating back to the early 1940s, but getting a big boost during the 1960s space race, the industry t r a c e s its roots back to Steward Observatory at The University of Arizona and the needs of astronomers. Two current examples are the $13 million VERITAS telescope array, being built for the Kitt Peak National Observatory S o Flagstaff acted, a n d kept acting. I n 1953, i t passed b y ten international academic institutions; a n d the the nation's first ordinance governing outdoor lights, Discovery Channel Telescope, a $35 million project set for w h i c h it has updated several completion in 2009 southeast t i m e s since. I n 2001, F l a g s t a f f of Flagstaff under the auspices M a j o r Astronomical Institutions in Arizona b e c a m e the world's first city o f the Lowell Observatory. t o earn IDA's "International However, the location of a few Lowell Observatory Dark Sky Community" award for a s t r o n o m y facilities unfortuMount Graham Observatory "e x c e p t i o n a l commitment" t o n a t e l y has provoked disputes Kitt Peak Observatory preserving dark skies. The city's w i t h some Native American Mount Hopkins Observatory d a r k sky advocates believe g r o u p s. L a w s u i t s and public Naval Observatory Steward Observatory everyone wins when communiopposition have forced institut i e s increase the quality, n o t t i o n s and tribal governments quantity, of their outdoor lightand organizations to negotiate ing: Night vision is improved, through many differences. With e n e r g y and natural resources c o m p r o m i s e s in place and are saved, safety is maintained, t e c h n o l o g i c a l innovations in a n d the nighttime visual envit h e pipeline, d a r k skies and ronment is protected. astronomy will continue to be an economic plus by contributing to Arizona's leadership in A l s o protected is Arizona's an important field. competitive advantage as an area well-suited to the pursuit Photo Credit: Cline Library, Northern Arizona University, NAU.PH.2003.11.51.M1192. of astronomy.
worldwide visibility for a series of dramatic discoveries -- notably the first sighting of Pluto and the first e v i d e n c e that the universe is expanding. B u t by the mid-20th century, even small Flagstaff (with a population of only about 25,000) was releasing enough artificial light into the atmosphere to threaten good "seeing" b y observatory telescopes.
P O L I C Y ISSUES D a r k Skies Over Arizona
P O L I C Y IDEAS
P O L I C Y PRODUCTS
Protection of an environmental feature that is an economic asset
Outdoor lighting standards and guidelines
"Dark Sky" state legislation and local ordinances
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
17
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
EDUCATION STANDARDS AND ACCOUNTABILITY
K - 1 2 academic achievement standards give clear direction for learning, teaching, and testing. A r i z o n a 's accountability system lets everyone know how much students are achieving.
E
E v e r y b o d y agrees kids should go to school. B u t what should they learn there? Arizona was among the first states to develop clear standards for determining what should be taught and learned -- and now monitored and tested. In 1990, Arizona lawmakers directed the Arizona Department of Education (ADE) to identify the "minimum course of study competencies for excellence in essential skills." At about the same time, the federal statute known as "Goals 2000" began offering money for states and school districts to develop strong academic standards. In 1995, the state legislature moved beyond "essential skills" to a mandate for academic standards -- what K-12 students should know and be able to do in reading, writing, arts, English, mathematics, science, and social studies/history. The task of writing the standards was a massive undertaking by hundreds of Arizonans working in state-appointed teams of teachers, scholars, subject experts, and parents. Their hard work paid off: As noted in Education Week's 2004 "Quality Counts" survey, "Arizona is one of seven states that have clear and specific standards in English, m a t h e m a t i c s, s c i e n c e, a n d social studies/history in elementary, middle, and high school."
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
18
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
But standards are just half of the achievement equation. Th e state's accountability system, w h i c h tracks how s t u d e n t s are doing, s u p p l i e s the other half. I n 2000, Proposition 301 provided ADE with funds to develop "a system to measure school performance based on student a c h i e v e m e n t , i n c l u d i n g student performance on the A I M S test." Th e LEARNS Achievement Profile (Leading E d u c a t i o n in Arizona through the Reporting and Notification System) is the result. Also in 2000, the U.S. Congress passed the No Child Left Behind Act, requiring states to track performance of public schools and school d i s t r i c t s. A D E now has a dual system that evaluates performance of public schools, school districts, and charter schools based on test results that generally reflect the state's academic standards. To use this information to improve results, Arizona began producing "school report cards" from the Arizona LEARNS Achievement Profiles. Although i t does not reward high performers, t h e department assists schools with low ratings and imposes sanctions on those that are consistently "under performing" or "failing." Arizona's assessment system gets high marks nationally f o r the variety of approaches used to gauge student achievement. Appraisals of the connection between tests and standards, however, show mixed results, since the process of aligning subjects and tests is still underway. Still, Arizona now has accepted statewide metrics for determining what students and teachers should do and where they must do better. The information critical to increasing academic achievement is in hand and already helping teachers and s c h o o l s to move Arizona's students ahead. I n c r e a s i n g a c a d e m i c accomplishment among all students is the " e n d " t h a t all these "means" a r e meant to achieve.
A r i z o n a K-12 Education Standards
STANDARD Arts Health/PE F o re i g n & Native Languages L a n g u a g e Arts R e a d i n g standard by grade level Wr i t i n g W r i t i n g standard b y grade level L i s t e n i n g & speaking/ V i e w i n g & presenting M a t h e m a t i c s standard by grade level S c i e n c e standard S c i e n c e standard b y grade level S o c i a l Studies standard S o c i a l Studies standard b y grade level Te c h n o l o g y W o r k p l a c e Skills YEAR ADOPTED S TAT U S
1997 1997 1997
In use In use In use
2003 1996 2004 1996 2003 1997 2004 2000 2005 2000 1997
In use Last year for use: 2004-2005 Transition: 2004-2005 In use: 2005-2006 In use In use Last year for use: 2004-2005 Transition: 2004-2005 In use: 2005-2006 Last year for use: 2004-2005 Transition: 2005-2006 In use: 2006-2007 In use In use
Source: Arizona Department of Education, 2005.
S c h o o l Accountability Measures
F e d e r a l (No Child Left Behind) E a c h performance target must be met O n e - y e a r snapshot of aggregate student performance Criteria S t a t e (Arizona LEARNS) Academic indicators c o u n t e r b a l a n c e each other Longitudinal examination o f individual performance Criteria � AIMS score � Measure of Academic
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP): � Arizona's Instruments to Measure Standards (AIMS) score � Percent of students assessed � Attendance and graduation rates
S c h o o l Evaluation Labels � Met AYP � Not Met AYP
Progress (MAP)
� Dropout & graduation rates � AYP S c h o o l Evaluation Labels � Excelling � High Performing � Performing � Under Performing � Fails to Meet Academic Standards
Source: Arizona Department of Education, 2005.
P O L I C Y ISSUES E d u c a t i o n Standards a n d Accountability
P O L I C Y IDEAS
P O L I C Y PRODUCTS
Greater student achievement Monitoring progress
Statewide academic K-12 learning standards Accountability system to monitor improvement
Arizona Academic Standards Arizona LEARNS Achievement Profile System Compliance with No Child Left Behind
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
19
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
FOREST HEALTH
R e s p o n d i n g to threats from wildfire, disease, and i n s e c t s , Arizonans have launched statewide initiatives t o reduce fire danger, preserve forest health, and e n a b l e people to better co-exist with nature.
F
Arizona's millions of forested acres may be less celebrated than its desert vistas, but they are equally cherished by residents and visitors. The state can tally over 11 million a c r e s of national forests and 4 million more acres of non-federal forested land, including the world's largest contiguous ponderosa pine forest. Arizona's arid climate and cycles of drought, fire, disease, and insect infestation have made the state fertile ground f o r academic forest expertise. J u s t as important, t h e state's officials, experts, and residents are breaking new ground in community planning for forest health. I n 2003, G o v e r n o r Janet Napolitano established the Fo r e s t Health Advisory Council and Governor's Forest Health Oversight Council as mechanisms for improving Arizona's forests. The Forest Health Advisory Council's mission focuses on, among other things, principles for restoration efforts, monitoring projects, and evaluating
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
20
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
F o re s t Acres Burned in Arizona, 2002-2005
YEAR T O TA L FIRES ACRES BURNED sustainable options for i n a plan. Th e s e community 2005 3,919 761,959 s m a l l - d i a m e t e r trees comp r o c e s s e s have attracted 2004 2,623 222,503 p a t i b l e with forest health r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s of federal, 2003 2,839 189,005 and economic development s t a t e, m u n i c i p a l and tribal 2002 3,218 629,876 g o a l s . T h e Forest Health agencies, and have produced Source: U.S. Forest Service. Oversight Council has a g r e e m e n t s on the location r e c o m m e n d e d and guided o f thinning projects and s t e p s forward in community education, p l a n n i n g , a n d t h e protection of homes and property. capacity building, as well as fund development. R e l a t e d s t a t e legislation has included a fuel tax discount for One example is the federally funded White Mountain t r u c k s that haul forest products and temporary tax Stewardship Project, one of the nation's largest forest breaks for some businesses to thin overgrown forests. restoration initiatives, which will treat 5,000 to 25,000 acres per year over ten years on the Apache-Sitgreaves I n addition, t h e federal Healthy Forests Restoration N a t i o n a l Forest. Th e project is expected to enhance Act of 2003 gives funding priority to thinning projects t h e local economy by commercializing previously i d e n t i f i e d through collaborative "community wildfire u n m a r ke t a b l e small trees. Th e win-win approach to p r o t e c t i o n plans." A r i z o n a has taken the community f o r e s t health and community protection offers ideas idea to heart: As of June 2005, 64 of 158 communities f o r other natural resource areas and the myriad of c h a l l e n g e s faced by all states. deemed to be at risk of severe wildfire had been included
P O L I C Y ISSUES F o r e s t Health
P O L I C Y IDEAS
P O L I C Y PRODUCTS
Prevention of losses from wildfires Restoring forest health
Community collaboration for preparation Broad-based resident participation Involve academic experts in advising communities Support small-diameter logging
Forest Health Advisory Council Governor's Forest Health Oversight Council
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
21
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT
T h e 1980 Groundwater Management Act settled some water disputes, preserved a precious resource, and shaped Arizona's modern pattern of urban development.
G
The state's water history features grand ideas, larger-thanlife personalities, and innovations born of necessity. But water is a current issue as well as a source of stories from a colorful past. Today, approximately 40% of Arizona's water comes from under the ground. The key to managing this precious resource is Arizona's 1980 Groundwater Management Act (GMA). Most public p o l i c y observers regard the GMA as one of the most significant pieces of legislation in Arizona history. The GMA is inextricably linked to the development of the Central Arizona Project (CAP), which delivers Colorado River water to Maricopa, Pinal, and Pima counties. B y the 1970s, d e c a d e s of groundwater pumping had depleted many of Arizona's underground reserves. At the same time, plans for the development of the Central Arizona Project were underway as well. The U.S. Interior Department demanded that federal CAP funding be contingent on Arizona controlling its groundwater use. Arizona had to act. As University of Arizona scholar Thomas Sheridan has written, Governor Bruce Babbitt "brought together the main interest groups -- mines, fa r m e r s, c i t i e s, a n d water companies -- and coaxed, c a j o l e d , a n d threatened them through a series of marathon meetings that lasted for more than two years."
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
22
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
S e l e c t e d Arizona Water Milestones
MILESTONE YEAR
Colorado River Compact approval by Arizona -- The agreement sets forth how Colorado River water will be divided by the "upper basin" and "lower basin" states. Arizona is in the lower basin. Authorization of Central Arizona Project Groundwater Management Act Arizona Department of Water Resources Assured Water Supply Rules Arizona Drought Management Plan -- The Arizona Department of Water Resources manages the plan. Arizona Water Settlement Act -- Federal legislation was passed to settle a number of state-tribal water disputes.
Source: Morrison Institute for Public Policy, 2006.
1922 1968 1980 1995 2004 2004
The result was legislation to control overdraft (when r e n e wa b l e water supplies: l a ke s, e f f l u e n t , a n d rivers, p u m p i n g outstrips replenishment), a l l o c a t e limited including Colorado River water delivered via the CAP. resources, and foster groundwater renewal. The act created the Arizona Department of Water Resources to administer N e w developments without ready access to renewable four Active Management Areas (AMAs) where overdraft water supplies can still comply with the Assured Water was most acute -- the Phoenix area, Pinal Supply through membership in the Central C o u n t y, t h e Prescott region, a n d metro A r i z o n a 's Major A r i z o n a Groundwater Replenishment Wa t e r Sources Tucson. In 1994, a fifth district, Santa Cruz District. Despite this arrangement, groundA M A , s p u n off from the Tucson AMA. Th e GMA's rules and regulations apply only in t h e active management areas, a l t h o u g h m a n y are calling for similar policies t h r o u g h o u t the state. Municipalities within AMAs comply with a variety of conservation requirements, including restrictions on the amount and type of water used in roadway medians and elsewhere. Most significantly, the GMA stipulates t h a t new developments have a 100-year " a s s u r e d water supply" o r locate within the service area of an AMA with an existing certificate. New state rules issued in 1995 require developments to use predominantly
SOURCE Groundwater Colorado River In-State Rivers Reclaimed Source: Arizona Department of Water Resources. %
40% 39% 19% 2%
water use currently still outpaces repleni s h m e n t . Th e state's goal is to create a b a l a n c e between the water withdrawn y e a r l y and the natural and artificial " r e c h a r g e " i n the Phoenix, P r e s c o t t , a n d Tucson AMAs by 2025. A significant side effect of the GMA has been to shape Arizona's urban development by encouraging growth in areas with, or near, existing infrastructure, thus forming the state's concentrated pattern of metro development. Most important, however, the GMA has given official recognition to the need to conserve precious groundwater while ensuring that responsible growth can occur.
P O L I C Y ISSUES G ro u n d w a t e r Management
P O L I C Y IDEAS
P O L I C Y PRODUCTS
Stable water supply for population and economic growth Settlement of conflicting claims Prevention of environmental problems
Development of management areas and requirement of 100 years of water for new developments Replenishing groundwater Settle major water disputes
Groundwater Management Act Indian water settlements
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
23
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
HERITAGE FUND
Arizona's rich heritage features a unique combination of natural wonders, a long human history, and a dramatic blend of cultures. In creating the Arizona Heritage Fund, residents showed their commitment to a broad perspective on conservation and preservation.
H
Arizona is one of 40 states to raise revenue through a state lottery. Approved by voters in 1980, lottery dollars support such efforts as the Local Transportation Assistance Fund, County Assistance Fund, Mass Transit Fund, Court Appointed Special Advocate Fund, and Commerce and Economic Development Commission. However, as a result of a citizens' initiative, beneficiaries of Arizona's lottery a l s o include wildlife and wild places, h i s t o r i c places, archaeological sites, parks, and trails. In 1990, Arizona voters made it clear that they had no desire to gamble with their state's heritage. By a nearly two-to-one margin, they set aside up to $20 million per
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
24
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
year in state lottery funds for often under-funded state p a r k s, h i s t o r i c preservation projects, a n d wildlife programs. Led by the Arizona Heritage Alliance, a coalition of outdoor sports enthusiasts, historic preservationists, and environmentalists, the effort enjoyed support from m a n y prominent Arizonans including Governor Bruce B a b b i t t , S e n a t o r Barry Goldwater, a n d Representative M o r r i s Udall. Th e Heritage Fund stands out in part because of the diversity of programs it supports. Funds have been used t o maintain trails, a c q u i r e and maintain habitat for endangered species, preserve historic and archeological sites, create and improve community and state parks, a n d provide environmental education. S i n c e it began, the Heritage Fund has received over $200 million. I r o n i c a l l y, t h e fund is sometimes itself threatened with e x t i n c t i o n . L e g i s l a t o r s have repeatedly considered r e d i r e c t i n g its resources, and during the budget crisis of 2003 agreed to a one-time diversion of $10.2 million to o t h e r uses. A s i d e from the money used to administer p r o g r a m s, H e r i t a g e Fund dollars are distributed via c o m p e t i t i v e grants. I n FY 2005, t h e fund received $ 2 1 . 1 million, i n c l u d i n g interest earnings and distributed $20.7 million for programs. By creating the Heritage Fund and protecting it from being "raided," Arizonans have s h o w n they want to protect the state's s t u n n i n g natural areas, r i c h habitats, a n d
A R I Z O N A GAME & FISH HERITAGE FUND PROGRAMS F Y 2005*
EXPENDITURES (000'S)
Acquisition Identification, Inventory, Acquisition, Protection and Management of Sensitive Species and Habitats Habitat Evaluation Urban Wildlife Environmental Education Public Access Total
* Includes carry forward from FY 2004. Source: Arizona Game and Fish Department.
$3,920
$5,282 $2,008 $2,540 $558 $621 $14,929
A R I Z O N A STATE PARKS F Y 2005*
EXPENDITURES (000'S)
Parks Acquisition and Development Trails Historic Preservation Local, Regional, and State Parks Total
* Includes carry forward from FY 2004. Source: Arizona State Parks.
$1,696 $591 $1,031 $2,440 $5,758
d i v e r s e cultural resources. Th e Heritage dollars provide resources to benefit today's residents and support programs to educate the next generation of Arizona stewards.
P O L I C Y ISSUES H e r i t a g e Fund
P O L I C Y IDEAS
POLICY PRODUCTS
Lack of funds for park, wildlife, and cultural and historic resources supported by the public
Use state lottery funds to support programs
Arizona Heritage Fund
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
25
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
INTEGRATION OF PUBLIC AGENCIES
T h e Arizona Department of Economic Security and Tucson's TREO illustrate a long-time commitment to streamlined public services.
I
Nobody wants taxpayer dollars to support two public p r o g r a m s when one would suffice. A t the same time, e x p e r i e n c e shows that increasingly complex public n e e d s are best met by comprehensive, c o o r d i n a t e d responses. Thus, public administration now looks everywhere for ways to combine, cooperate, and collaborate. In Arizona, two examples -- one more 30 years old and one just about two years old -- stand out. I n 1971, e i g h t different Arizona public entities admini s t e r e d federal and state welfare, u n e m p l o y m e n t , a n d social programs. In 1972, the Arizona Legislature created the Arizona Department of Economic Security (DES) "to provide an integration of direct services to people of this state in a pattern that would reduce duplication
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
26
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
T H E N AND NOW: CREATING THE ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC SECURITY
T H E N : 8 SEPARATE AGENCIES N O W : 1 AGENCY
Employment Security Commission and State Employment Service Unemployment Compensation and Administrative Service divisions Apprenticeship Council State Office of Manpower Planning State Office of Economic Opportunity State Department of Public Welfare Division of Vocational Rehabilitation State Department of Mental Retardation
Source: Arizona Department of Economic Security.
Department of Economic Security Division of Aging & Community Services Division of Benefits and Medical Eligibility Division of Child Support Enforcement Division of Children, Youth & Families Division of Developmental Disabilities Division of Employment & Rehabilitation Services Division of Business and Technology Services Division of Employee Services and Support Division of Policy and Program Development Evaluation
of administrative efforts, services, and expenditures." The t h r e e decades since have included many ups and downs because social issues changed over time and the promise of integration went largely unfulfilled. Some recent observers have even s u g g e s t e d breaking the department into pieces again. However, others have reinforced the idea of integration as they have reorganized to better advance DES' mission to "promote t h e safety, w e l l - b e i n g , a n d self-sufficiency of children, adults, and families." In 2005, the search for a better structure took a similar turn in Tucson with the debut of
T R E O (Tucson Regional Economic Opportunities, I n c ) . T h i s new nonprofit organization merged the economic development programs of governm e n t , t h e private sector, a n d higher e d u c a t i o n across city and county b o u n d a r i e s. T R E O now does the work f o r m e r l y done by the Greater Tucson E c o n o m i c Council, C i t y of Tucson, a n d P i m a County to further business and c o m m u n i t y development throughout g r e a t e r Tucson. W i t h Arizona's growing p o p u l a t i o n , s t r e a m l i n e d public administ r a t i o n -- whether in social services or e c o n o m i c development -- plays an import a n t part in the state's ability to build and m a i n t a i n a vibrant economy.
P O L I C Y ISSUES I n t e g r a t i o n of Public Agencies
P O L I C Y IDEAS
POLICY PRODUCTS
Duplicative, fragmented public services Costly administration
Consolidation of public agencies Public-private sector cooperation
Arizona Department of Economic Security TREO
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
27
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
JURY REFORM
A r i z o n a 's jury reforms further empower jurors and reinforce the state's commitment to an informed, active citizenry.
J
Despite its importance, jury duty seems to rank low on most people's list of civic duties. Indeed, the increasing difficulty of finding enough citizens to participate has prompted a national jury reform movement in which Arizona has played a leading part. Arizona's jury reform efforts began in 1993, led primarily by now-retired Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Michael Dann. The Arizona Supreme Court Committee on More Effective Use of Juries, composed of former j u r o r s , j u r y administrators, a t t o r n e y s , j u d g e s , a n d s c h o l a r s, wa s charged with examining jury and trial practices and suggesting improvements. Major concerns included the lack of broad community representation in jury pools, the passive nature of jury service, and the p u b l i c 's low priority for jury service. Th e committee produced Jurors: The Power of 12 with 55 recommend a t i o n s for reforming the state's jury system. T h e
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
28
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
" W h a t 's so innovative about the Arizona jury reform experience is what happens inside the c o u r t r o o m ... t h e opening up of the jury system, the movement from the jurors in their passive r o l e to a much more active role in the trial. It's been a grand experiment." -- Gordon Griller, former administrator of Maricopa County Superior Court
committee reported "unacceptably low levels of juror comprehension of the evidence" as one of the motivating f a c t o r s in urging the Supreme Court to adopt its jury reform recommendations. C h a n g e came quickly. I n 1996, j u r o r s were authorized to question witnesses during trials. In addition, jurors now may take notes and study photographs and case s u m m a r i e s. A n emphasis on simple language -- in contrast to "legalese" -- was another departure from the past. In 2004, jurors who serve more than ten days and are not compensated by their employers may be eligible f o r assistance from the Arizona Lengthy Trial Fund. Legal experts believe Arizona's innovations will catch on with even more
s t a t e s, a s recent studies have shown few drawbacks to new procedures. Two field experiments on jury note t a k i n g , f o r example, f o u n d that it increased juror satisfaction without affecting attention or providing an advantage to one side or the other. J u r y reform is just one way of making service more attractive to citizens. Technology is being used to make j u r y service more convenient for c i t i z e n s. Fo r example, p r o s p e c t i v e S u p e r i o r Court jurors may obtain information and change their service date online at the court's web site. J u r y reform may not be a headline issue, but how this critical part of the j u s t i c e system functions makes a difference in one of the fundamental areas of public policy and government.
P O L I C Y ISSUES J u r y Reform
P O L I C Y IDEAS
POLICY PRODUCTS
Decreasing representation in jury pools Need to increase the number of citizens willing to serve on juries
Make service easier and more rewarding
Arizona Supreme Court jury reform initiatives
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
29
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
KNOWLEDGE ECONOMY
M a k i n g Arizona a stronger player in the global knowledge economy will benefit the entire state. Over time, many ideas have supported innovation and talent.
K
Arizona's economy was once dependent on what could be grown on or extracted from the land. Those days are long gone. Arizona, like states and nations around the globe, is now racing to compete in a rapidly changing global knowledge economy and assuming:
�
Advances in science and technology will create wealth at an even faster rate than in the past 50 years. I n n o va t i o n has joined human and natural resources and investment as a critical ingredient f o r economic growth. C o m p e t i t i v e n e s s will depend increasingly on public and private research capacity. Skilled, flexible, and creative workers are at the heart of innovation and prosperity.
�
�
�
Military investments in Arizona during World War II and the start of an electronics industry in the 1950s laid the foundation for today's growing knowledge economy. Today Arizona is strongest in such knowledge economy fields as advanced communications, aerospace, and high tech manufacturing. Promising industries include biosciences and "sustainable systems." But developing a strong knowledge economy is an evolving process, not a one-time event. Many actions in many areas add up to competitiveness.
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
30
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
The following investments are representative of Arizona's ideas for a dynamic knowledge economy. A r i z o n a voters passed Proposition 301 in 2000 to i m p r o v e K-12 education, i n c r e a s e community college o c c u p a t i o n a l capacity, a n d expand university science a n d technology research. " P - 2 0 " i s shorthand for education from preschool through graduate education. Governor's P-20 Council is working to align education with the economy for all ages. I n 2002, F l i n n Foundation led a broad public-private process that created the Arizona Biosciences Roadmap, which laid out how Arizona could place in the emerging field of biosciences, and launched numerous complementary actions. In turn, Governor Jane Hull appointed t h e Arizona BioInitiative Task Force in 2002 to help convince the Inter-national Genomics Consortium and the Translational Genomics Research Institute to make Phoenix their home. The state's foundations, businesses, and governments pledged $ 9 0 million to secure what many have called Arizona's most important economic investments in a generation. Th e state's three universities have created the Arizona Biomedical Collaborative to bring together i n t e r d i s c i p l i n a r y research in biotechnology and biosciences and to complement medical
expertise at The University of Arizona and its Phoenix medical school campus. In 2004, SCF Arizona, the state's workers' compensation insurance firm, was the first investor in the Knowledge Economy Capital Fund, a "fund of funds" expected to gather $100 million for investments in knowledge economy firms and initiatives. In 2006, public and private sector leaders joined together to create Science Foundation Arizona. This private, nonprofit organization will invest in science and technology research and engage in a variety of strategies to boost Arizona's global competitiveness. "Sustainable systems" or products and services that relate to such areas as renewable energy and environmental quality have been identified as areas with high potential f o r Arizona. Th e Arizona Water Institute capitalizes o n the expertise of the state's universities to assist communities with water issues, but it also is expected to transfer new waterr e l a t e d technologies and products to the marketplace. A l l Arizonans have a stake in a leadinge d g e knowledge economy because of the p r o s p e r i t y created by such firms and jobs. A r i z o n a 's future economy will take off from today's ideas.
P O L I C Y ISSUES K n o w l e d g e Economy
P O L I C Y IDEAS
POLICY PRODUCTS
Coping with economic change Lack of competitiveness Need for innovation
Support for science and technology research Targeted public and private support for industries Improving education at all levels Expanding occupation t ra i n i n g University research collaboration
Package to support TGen Arizona Biomedical Collaborative Proposition 301 Arizona P-20 Council
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
31
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
LITERACY FOR FAMILIES
W h e n parents and young children read together, much more is learned than the ABCs.
L
Academic research has shown repeatedly that those children who lack experience with books because their parents cannot read well start school at a disadvantage. A t the same time, l o w literacy levels limit parents' employment opportunities. A negative cycle of narrow opportunity and limited achievement is one of a variety o f factors that traps families in poverty. A common sense approach to breaking the cycle focuses on helping parents improve their reading skills, which in turn leads to better employment options and encourages higher achievement among their children. This concept is at the heart of Arizona Family Literacy a n d its work with the state's neediest parents and children. What started as a community-based effort in the early 1990s has become a standard part of adult education services statewide. Initiated by state lawmakers i n 1994 as part of Healthy Families, Fa m i l y Literacy, Health Start, the legislation was reauthorized in 1998.
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
32
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
Administered by the Arizona Department of Education, Family Literacy serves the most disadvantaged families of any publicly funded pre-school program. Targeted to poor families with at least one child under age eight in w h i c h the parents have the lowest levels of literacy, Fa m i l y Literacy combines early childhood education, a d u l t basic education, p a r e n t i n g skills, p a r e n t - c h i l d literacy activities, community service, and home-based instruction. The program helps make youngsters ready for and comfortable in school, while giving parents the skills to improve their jobs. Federal programs, including Workforce Investment Act, Head Start, and No Child Left Behind, augment Arizona's Family Literacy e f f o r t s. B u t the need remains g r e a t , a n d even with state a n d federal funds, Fa m i l y L i t e r a c y can serve only a small fraction of the families w h o qualify. Fa m i l y Literacy is just one part of a growing commitment in
Arizona to "school readiness" and early childhood education. For example, Governor Napolitano has spearheaded the drive for voluntary state-funded all-day kindergarten and it is spreading across Arizona. In fact, the Arizona Legislature appropriated dollars in 2007 to complete the funding of all-day kindergarten statewide. The governor-appointed Arizona School Readiness Board has created a broad plan to improve child care, recruit early childhood education professionals, improve children's access to health care, and assist low income families with the cost of child care. Fa m i l y Literacy, a l l - d a y kindergarten, a n d school r e a d i n e s s go to some of the "root causes" o f poor achievement and workforce deficiencies. T h e y exemplify the long-term investments in the s t a t e ' s future t h a t will yield dividends for i n d i v i d u a l s, f a m ilies, employers, a n d the state as a whole.
P O L I C Y ISSUES L i t e r a c y for Families
P O L I C Y IDEAS
POLICY PRODUCTS
Negative effects of low adult literacy on children's achievement Limited school readiness among low income children
Parent and child literacy programs Helping parents to help children Parents as teachers
Healthy Families, Family Literacy, Health Start Arizona School Readiness Board Action Plan All-day kindergarten
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
33
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
ARIZONA IDEAS: POLICY ISSUES, IDEAS, AND PRODUCTS
P O L I C Y ISSUES
P O L I C Y IDEAS
P O L I C Y PRODUCTS
A B C
AHCCCS
Indigent health care put counties in fiscal crisis Balance between health care cost and quality Stable, secure water supplies for growth and development
Managed care Competition among providers
Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System
B a s i c to Arizona: Salt River Project and Central Arizona Project C i t i z e n - L e d Government
Large-scale "reclamation" projects to store and deliver water Direct democracy Short terms for most officials Frequent elections Citizen empowerment Convenience for citizens Outdoor lighting standards and guidelines Statewide academic K-12 learning standards Accountability system to monitor i m p ro v e m e n t
Salt River Project Central Arizona Project Referendum, initiative, and recall "Clean Elections" Early voting/vote by mail Motor voter registration
Prevention of special interest influence on government Citizen-controlled government
D E
D a r k Skies Over Arizona
Protection of an environmental feature that is an economic asset Greater student achievement Monitoring progress
"Dark Sky" state legislation and local ordinances Arizona Academic Standards Arizona LEARNS Achievement Profile System Compliance with No Child Left Behind Forest Health Advisory Council Governor's Forest Health Oversight Council
E d u c a t i o n Standards and Accountability
F
F o r e s t Health
Prevention of losses from wildfires Restoring forest health
Community collaboration for preparation Broad-based resident participation Involve academic experts in advising communities Support small-diameter logging Development of management areas and requirement of 100 years of water for new developments Replenishing groundwater Settle major water disputes Use state lottery funds to support programs
G
G ro u n d w a t e r Management
Stable water supply for population and economic growth Settlement of conflicting claims Prevention of environmental p ro b l e m s
Groundwater Management Act Indian water settlements
H I J K
H e r i t a g e Fund
Lack of funds for park, wildlife, and cultural and historic resources supported by the public Duplicative, fragmented public services Costly administration Decreasing representation in jury pools Need to increase the number of citizens willing to serve on juries Coping with economic change Lack of competitiveness Need for innovation
Arizona Heritage Fund
I n t e g r a t i o n of Public Agencies
Consolidation of public agencies Public-private sector cooperation
Arizona Department of Economic Security TREO Arizona Supreme Court jury reform initiatives
J u r y Reform
Make service easier and more rewarding
K n o w l e d g e Economy
Support for science and technology research Targeted public and private support for industries Improving education at all levels Expanding occupation training University research collaboration Parent and child literacy programs Helping parents to help children Parents as teachers Support for master planning
Package to support TGen Arizona Biomedical Collaborative Proposition 301 Arizona P-20 Council
L M
L i t e r a c y for Families
Negative effects of low adult literacy on children's achievement Limited school readiness among low income children
Healthy Families, Family Literacy, Health Start Arizona School Readiness Board Action Plan All-day kindergarten Planning and zoning processes friendly to large-scale planning
M a s t e r Planned Communities
Quality development Accommodating rapid growth
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
34
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
P O L I C Y ISSUES
P O L I C Y IDEAS
P O L I C Y PRODUCTS
N O
N o n - P a r t i s a n Local Gover nment
Strong local governments Prevention of proliferation of cities and competition
Separation of policy and politics from operational responsibility Limiting incorporations
Non-partisan, council-manager governance Approval of new cities by existing municipalities Arizona Highways Arizona Arts Trust Fund Arizona ArtShare Public art as infrastructure
O u t There with A r t s and Culture
Tourism and economic development Essential building blocks for arts and culture Creating a sense of place in communities Lack of economic competitiveness Longevity and durability of freeway surfaces Disruption of neighborhoods Environmental preservation and restoration Center city revitalization Urban amenities
Promotion tools New sources of funds Using artists and public art in communities
P Q R
P l a n n i n g for Economic Growth
Statewide plan for economic development based on clusters and foundation Use of rubberized asphalt in freeway construction and resurfacing Re-establish dammed rivers to support recreation, tourism, and quality of life Restrictions on use and pumping Removal of dams Parental choice Competition
Arizona Strategic Plan for Economic Development Quiet Pavement project Assuming use of quiet paving Rio Salado Rio Nuevo City and county ordinances protecting washes
Q u i e t Roads
R i v e r s in the Desert
S
S c h o o l Choice
Student achievement Equal opportunity
Open enrollment Tuition tax credits Charter schools Alternative schools Magnet schools Proposition 300 in 1985 Proposition 400 in 2004
T U
Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n for a Region
Inadequate state funding for freeways in Maricopa County Regional transportation demand
Asking voters for sales tax for transportation Regional planning among elected officials Expanding research capacity and funding Investments in faculty, centers, and students Cross-university collaborations Technology commercialization Support for major manufacturers and related firms Quality of life Favorable business climate Collaboration among state, federal, and local agencies to develop and maintain a state-long hiking trail Public involvement in trail development and maintenance Promote xeriscape and landscaping standards suitable to the desert environment
U n i v e r s i t y Science and Te c h n o l o g y Investments
Competitiveness in a knowledge economy
Proposition 301 University facility funding "Angel investors'" tax credit
V W
Ve r y Important Chips
Competitive regional and state economies Creation and retention of high wage jobs Support for recreation and tourism Appreciation of Arizona's diverse environment
University and industry partnerships Water management Tax incentives Arizona Trail
Wa l k on the Arizona Trail
X Y
Xeriscape
Water conservation
Municipal xeriscape ordinances Public information campaigns Classes for homeowners and professional landscapers Greater Phoenix Economic Council TREO Greater Flagstaff Economic Council Yuma Economic Development Council Urban Lands Act 2006 statewide ballot initiative
Yo u r s , Mine, Ours: R e g i o n a l Economic Development
Municipal competition for economic development Need for greater economic diversity Desire for economic leadership Lack of long-term competitiveness State trust land in path of urban growth and effects on development Maximizing the value of state trust land Outdated state trust land p ro c e s s e s
Regional organization for economic development Division of roles and responsibilities among organizations
Z
Z e a l for State Trust Land
Planning before disposition Reform efforts
Source: Morrison Institute for Public Policy, 2006.
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
35
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
MASTER PLANNED COMMUNITIES
S o m e of the nation's earliest master planned communities are in Arizona. Ready-made, full-service communities have given certainty to planners and residents alike.
M
Start with a westward shift of population and vast tracts of inexpensive land. Stir in municipalities' desire for growth and economic development. Add arriving r e s i d e n t s ' demand for housing and amenities. Fi n i s h with a developer-friendly style of city planning. That is Arizona's recipe for master planned communities -- a development form long associated with the state. Development innovators from the builders of Litchfield Pa r k to John F. L o n g and Del E. We b b and others have d o n e much to make master planned communities an e n d u r i n g feature of Arizona's metropolitan areas. Th e Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company began Litchfield Park in the 1930s to have a quality community for employees,
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
36
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
w h i l e Long was a "community builder" w h o saw p a r k s and schools as important to the "good life" a s h o u s i n g . We b b 's Sun City pioneered the "active adult" c o m m u n i t y. I n fact, m a s t e r planned communities appealed to buyers because of the opportunity to live, work, and play close to home. A house came with a readym a d e lifestyle in a ready-made community, c o m p l e t e w i t h hospitals, o f f i c e parks, g o l f courses, r e c r e a t i o n , and shopping. For example, the 1960s start of Sun City was the precursor to Ahwatukee and development of Green Valley o u t s i d e of Tucson in the 1970s. A h w a t u ke e 's sibling M o u n t a i n Park Ranch, t h e West Valley's Arrowhead R a n c h , S c o t t s d a l e 's McCormick Ranch, a n d Mesa's Dobson Ranch debuted in the 1980s. The 1990s brought t h e Foothills, D C Ranch, E s t r e l l a Mountain, Civano, and McDowell Mountain Ranch to the a t t e n t i o n of new and established residents a l i ke, w h i l e more retirement communities opened in the West Valley. A s one commentator said, " M a y b e t h e best thing about master planned
c o m m u n i t i e s is that they are not some government version of utopia, but a private sector innovation." Still, t h e s e mega-projects depend heavily upon public p o l i c i e s that help solve water issues, provide facilitate t h e development of services. I n turn, m a s t e r planned c o m m u n i t i e s supply certainty on appearance, a s s e t s, a n d tax base to cities and counties. I n contrast, t h e certainty of master planned communities also has often been the basis for the "business as usual" style that has left many worrying about the quality of urban growth. To d a y, m a s t e r planned communities such as DMB's Ve r r a d o at the White Tank Mountains, V i s t a n c i a in g r e a t e r Phoenix's northwest corner, a n d Saddlebrook n o r t h w e s t of Tucson are carrying on the tradition. These and many more are continuing t h e "community building" f a v o r e d by past development leaders. Drawing from s m a l l - t o w n culture and design, C i v a n o, V e r r a d o , a n d Vistancia are moving master planning into the 21st century and creating the next generation of a type of development deeply rooted i n Arizona.
P O L I C Y ISSUES M a s t e r Planned Communities
P O L I C Y IDEAS
POLICY PRODUCTS
Quality development Accommodating rapid growth
Support for master planning
Planning and zoning processes friendly to large-scale planning
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
37
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
NON-PARTISAN LOCAL GOVERNMENT
Arizonans' support for the council-manager form of city government reflects a no-nonsense approach that seeks to reward merit and focus on people rather than politics.
N
In the end, the quality of a democracy rests neither on the grandeur of its rhetoric nor the nobility of its ideals, but on the ethical standards implicit in its mundane d a i l y mechanics. Th a t 's why the ubiquity of the nonpartisan council-manager government -- used by 81 of Arizona's 89 cities and towns -- stands out in the state's p u b l i c policy history. L i ke the state's constitution, t h i s aspect of municipal governance is rooted in the early 20th-century Progressive Movement; also like the state's constitution, it continues to help keep government open to public scrutiny. Good-government advocates in Arizona and elsewhere set up council-manager governments -- administrations without ties to political parties -- to prevent the development of city political "machines" that gained infamy in older cities and to keep special interests from gaining
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
38
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
S t re n g t h in Low Numbers
A n o t h e r noteworthy feature of Arizona local governments i s simply that there are so few of them. B a c k in the 1950s, M a r i c o p a County residents realized that the coming p o p u l a t i o n boom would bring pressure to form many new l o c a l governments. I n h a b i t a n t s and leaders of the M a r y v a l e and Sunnyslope areas west and north of P h o e n i x wanted to become their own cities, b u t others f e a r e d more municipalities would spawn wasteful compet i t i o n among jurisdictions -- as had happened in the Los A n g e l e s region. I n 1961, t h e Arizona Legislature mandated t h a t current cities had to consent to the creation of a new m u n i c i p a l i t y nearby. T h u s Maryvale, S u n n y s l o p e, a n d other a r e a s became part of the City of Phoenix through annexation. Today, with regional action increasingly necessary on s o many issues, f e w e r governments have, i n d e e d , t u r n e d o u t to have been a good idea.
control of city services. B y combining non-partisan elected councils with appointed professional managers w h o would be responsible for service delivery, t h e y hoped that municipal governments would be more likely to serve the people rather than the powerful. It seems to have worked. In fact, scholars rank the councilm a n a g e r system as a major American contribution to p o l i t i c a l theory. Fo r one thing, i t affords each council member a stronger voice in policy, which in turn increases citizens' influence on their representatives. For another, it provides for decision making by the entire elected body, thereby reducing the power of special interests. Fi n a l l y, i t places city services under the authority of a p r o f e s s i o n a l manager who, t h o u g h appointed by and a n s w e r a b l e to the council, r e m a i n s more likely to make decisions based on efficiency and merit rather than politics. A c c e p t a n c e of the councilm a n a g e r form in nearly all A r i z o n a municipalities has made local governments quite u n i f o r m a c r o s s t h e s t a t e. Experts say it has also played
a role in the emergence of well-run, w e l l - r e s p e c t e d municipalities that often win national and international a w a r d s. P h o e n i x , f o r example, w o n the 1993 Carl Bertelsmann Prize, a prestigious international award recognizing the best-run city government i n the world. P h o e n i x is also a four-time All-America City winner. Tempe and Mesa have a l s o earned All-America City h o n o r s, a n d Scottsdale was voted the Most Livable City by the U.S. Conference of Mayors in 1993, among other awards.
P O L I C Y ISSUES N o n - P a r t i s a n Local Gover nment
P O L I C Y IDEAS
POLICY PRODUCTS
Strong local governments Prevention of proliferation of cities and competition
Separation of policy and politics from operational responsibility Limiting incorporations
Non-partisan, council-manager governance Approval of new cities by existing municipalities
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
39
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
OUT THERE WITH ARTS AND CULTURE
By design, Arizonans are increasingly taking advantage of arts and culture's unique contributions to tourism, education, and communities' sense of place.
O
Arts and culture contribute in one way or another to nearly all areas of public policy. Increasingly, however, arts and culture stands out in three vital areas: how t o u r i s t s learn about and experience the state, h o w residents of all ages have access to a broad range of opportunities to learn, share experiences, and be entertained, and how artists serve communities' economies and sense of place. For example, Arizona Highways has used photographs by some of the state and nation's leading artists to carry the message of Arizona's beauty and unique mix of cultures around the world. Originally, though, Arizona Highways was an inspiration born of practicality. Roads were something of a novelty to Arizona in the 1920s. Automobiles were rare -- too rare for job security in the Highway Department. To rev up the engines of state tourism, staff members came up with the idea of prom o t i n g Arizona through a magazine about its growing h i g h wa y system. A r i z o n a Highways began to take its c u r r e n t form as an art-quality photography magazine i n the late 1930s, a n d soon became known for its i n n o va t i o n s. S i n c e 1938, t h e magazine has not carried
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
40
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
paid advertising. In 1946, the magazine became the first n a t i o n a l publication to present an all-color issue. I t s effect on the state -- which continues today -- includes supporting the state's $30 billion tourism industry. Critics often fault elected officials with not thinking beyond the next election, but the development of the Arizona Arts Trust Fund and Arizona ArtShare show otherwise. In 1988, state leaders agreed that augmenting state-level grant funds for arts and culture organizations would be a wise investment. New money to expand grant programs was found in an idea new to Arizona but rooted in the fact that there are many connections between businesses and the arts. A $15 fee on corporate registrations goes to the Arizona Arts Trust Fund, which is administered by the Arizona Commission on the Arts. The approximately $1 million generated annually is distributed competitively across the state by the commission. In 1996, state officials, business leaders and arts advocates designed the Arizona Arts Endowment Fund -- known now as Arizona ArtShare. The public-private endowment, managed by the Arizona Commission on the Arts and the Arizona Community Foundation, has had a multi-faceted impact on arts and culture. One part is modeled after the National A r t s Stabilization capacitybuilding program and strengthens arts organizations' financial foundations. ArtShare also a s s i s t s teachers, s c h o o l dist r i c t s, a n d arts organizations t o implement high quality a r t s education programs that m e e t the state standards for w h a t K-12 students should
know and be able to do in visual art, music, dance, drama, and literature. Finally, before ArtShare, almost no Arizona arts organizations had active endowment programs. Now many do with millions of dollars targeted to ensure strength in the future. The Arizona Legislature completed the public contribution to ArtShare in 2006. I n Arizona, " p u b l i c art" m e a n s art, d e s i g n , a n d lands c a p e architecture that make communities more dist i n c t i v e and livable. I t is integral to how communities l o o k and feel. B y the 1970s, m a n y towns and cities n a t i o n w i d e, i n c l u d i n g Tucson, h a d passed public art o r d i n a n c e s to ensure that 1% of public capital i m p r o v e m e n t funds purchased public art. P h o e n i x a d o p t e d such an ordinance in 1986, b u t the recently c r e a t e d Phoenix Arts Commission blazed a new trail b y connecting practicing artists with targeted proje c t s right from the beginning. W i t h artists working a l o n g s i d e engineers and architects, e v e r y t h i n g from c a n a l banks to wastewater treatment plants took on a decidedly artistic look that said "Phoenix." T h e i d e a spread quickly and has since become a state m o d e l and a national influence. In these instances and more, Arizona's embrace of creative a p p r o a c h e s to supporting a r t s and culture has helped d e v e l o p a local sense of p l a c e and models for other cities and states.
Artist Credit: David Joyce, "Flight of Phoenix" Phoenix Airport Museum collection. Photo Credit: Marilyn Szabo.
P O L I C Y ISSUES O u t There with A r t s and Culture
P O L I C Y IDEAS
POLICY PRODUCTS
Tourism and economic development Essential building blocks for arts and culture Creating a sense of place in communities
Promotion tools New sources of funds Using artists and public art in communities
Arizona Highways Arizona Arts Trust Fund Arizona ArtShare Public art as infrastructure
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
41
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
PLANNING FOR ECONOMIC GROWTH
A r i z o n a 's business and government leaders joined forces to forge a statewide strategic plan that left a legacy of public-private cooperation for economic development.
P
The late-1980s recession hit Arizona hard. Times were t o u g h and the state's economy needed more than a b o o s t e r shot of optimism. N e w direction came from business leaders active in the Phoenix Futures Forum, E n t e r p r i s e Network, a Phoenix-based organization of entrepreneurs, and other organizations. This group -- soon aided by the Arizona Department of Commerce, Arizona Legislature, and other economic development o r g a n i z a t i o n s and many businesspeople -- pushed t h e creation of the first-ever statewide economic d e v e l o p m e n t plan. Th e result was the 1991 Arizona Strategic Plan for Economic Development (ASPED).
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
42
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
Two aspects of ASPED put Arizona on the leading edge o f economic development nationally:
�
Acceptance of "Clusters" and "Foundations" Arizona was one of the first states in the U.S. to adopt the cluster model for economic development. Harvard University's Michael Porter helped develop and popularize the concept that economies were b u i l t on "clusters" ( g e o g r a p h i c concentrations of interdependent firms in related industries that attract other firms and create value) and supported b y "foundations" s u c h as human resources, t r a n s p o r t a t i o n , a n d tax and regul a t o r y systems. E c o n o m i c growth w a s a matter of strengthening c l u s t e r s and improving the supporti n g f o u n d a t i o n s. Inclusive Public Process and Public-Private Financing A l a n Hald, E n t e r p r i s e Network leader and MicroAge founder, a host of other business leaders, and many public institutions created a statewide process that was open to everyone who
w a n t e d a voice in creating a better economic f u t u r e. L o c a l public meetings, s t a t e w i d e "town halls," and a wide variety of working groups made ASPED an inclusive process. With both successes and tough lessons, ASPED provided a touchstone f o r future public processes and private sector leadership. Some of today's highly visible groups such as the Arizona Technology Council are descendants of ASPED cluster groups. After the completion of the plan, GSPED, the Governor's Strategic Plan for Economic Development, was created in the Arizona Department of Commerce to keep implementation m o v i n g and to lead -- along with the p r i v a t e sector -- the many initiatives contained in ASPED. ASPED earned substantial recognition for Arizona, including awards from the Southern Growth Policy Board, National Council for Urban Economic Development, and Council of Governors' Policy Advisors. It set the stage for more publicprivate endeavors to increase Arizona's comp e t i t i v e n e s s and embrace new approaches t o economic growth.
�
P O L I C Y ISSUES P l a n n i n g for Economic Growth
P O L I C Y IDEAS
POLICY PRODUCTS
Lack of economic competitiveness
Statewide plan for economic development based on clusters and foundation
Arizona Strategic Plan for Economic Development
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
43
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
QUIET ROADS
Te c h n o l o g y allows old tires to be recycled for freeway and highway paving that also smoothes the way for more peaceful neighborhoods and lower road maintenance costs.
Q
Imagine old tires broken up so much that the dark mixt u r e looks like ground coffee. W h e n these "grounds" a r e mixed with regular asphalt and laid down as pavement, the new "rubberized asphalt" reduces noise by approximately 50%. Since 75% of freeway noise comes from the rubber meeting the road, it seems only fitting to reduce it with worn-out tires. Quiet roads have gained widespread popularity in part b e c a u s e substantial freeway construction in Maricopa C o u n t y has highlighted the technology. H o w e v e r, p u t t i n g "crumb rubber" i n asphalt is not a new idea.
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
44
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
The City of Phoenix used ground tires as an ingredient in its "chip sealing" from the mid-1960s to the end of the 1980s. City workers noticed that the asphalt m i x t u r e was long lasting and required little maintenance.
Q u i e t Road Facts
15 million old tires recycled to date 1,500 used per lane per mile
G r a n t e d , r e t r o f i t t i n g freeways with rubberized asphalt is relatively costly. Many have questioned why new freeways were not built with the quiet paving. According
t o ADOT, t h e Federal Highway Admini s t r a t i o n (FHA) did not approve of the 50% reduction in rubberized asphalt for noise reduction until freeway noise v e r y recently. W i t h freeway construction I n 1988, t h e Arizona Department of Source: Arizona Department of Transportation. heavily dependent on federal funds even Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n (ADOT) began using w i t h state dollars in the mix, l o c a l roada s p h a l t rubber friction courses -- i.e., building plans had to follow the rules. In 2003, however, rubberized pavement -- on highways as a preservation, ADOT and FHA began a program to document the pros r a t h e r than a noise reduction, t e c h n i q u e. Th e old-tire and cons of rubberized asphalt. component reduced cracking and had adequate skid resistance and excellent durability. The rubber additive a l s o had important side benefits: 1 ) It reduces noise; 2) It provides an alternative to putting used tires in landfills; and 3) It retains less heat than traditional materials. Considering that approximately 2 million tires are discarded annually just in Maricopa County, a use for the cast-offs is a boon. In addition, t i r e s in landfills easily catch fire, creating another environm e n t a l hazard. C o o l e r roads a l s o help mitigate the "heat i s l a n d effect" t h a t is making Arizona's urban areas warmer. ADOT and Maricopa Association of Governments are now well into the implementation of the $34 million Q u i e t Pavement project to resurface approximately 115 miles of urban freeways. With more than 3,100 miles of highways across the state covered with rubberized asphalt, quiet roads are becoming the rule rather than the exception. Those who live close to freeways and those w h o drive on them say they are thankful for a little more peace and quiet.
P O L I C Y ISSUES Q u i e t Roads
P O L I C Y IDEAS
POLICY PRODUCTS
Longevity and durability of freeway surfaces Disruption of neighborhoods
Use of rubberized asphalt in freeway construction and resurfacing
"Quiet Pavement" p ro j e c t Assuming use of quiet paving
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
45
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
RIVERS IN THE DESERT
P u b l i c policies point to the re-valuing of Arizona's waterways after a century of development.
R
The modern story of Arizona's waterways is mostly one of human efforts to control the desert's most valuable resource. But in recent years, attitudes toward desert rivers and washes have begun to change from "just use it" to a desire to restore drained waterways, preserve washes as natural areas, and create urban amenities from areas that also serve as flood control. Scottsdale's I n d i a n Bend Wash is one of the most well-known examples of this idea. Throughout the state, reinvigorating desert water flows is now a strategy for quality of life and economic revitali z a t i o n , a s well as environmental rebirth. I n addition, continued population growth has spurred a new sense of urgency to protect the state's few untouched waterways. Recent examples of waterway initiatives include:
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
46
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
Phoenix's Rio Salado Project has been called "one of the most effective displays of federal and local teamwork throughout the West." Since it opened to the public in November 2005, the restored 595-acre riparian habitat i n the Salt River is a recreation destination and an environmental education center. Th e dividing eyesore b e t w e e n north and south Phoenix has gotten a new lease on life and is expected to bring the communities on both sides of the river closer together. Tempe Town Lake reflects another approach to revitalizing the Salt River. More than two million people a year boat, fish, and attend special events at the lake between d o w n t o w n Tempe and Papago Park. To w n Lake is a m a j o r reason why new downtown residences, o f f i c e c o m p l e x e s, a n d the Tempe Performing Arts Center are under construction. D o w n t o w n Tucson will soon celebrate the rebirth of t h e Santa Cruz River as part of the multifaceted Rio N u e v o Project. Th e city, P i m a County, a n d U.S. A r m y C o r p s of Engineers are recrea t i n g the desert environment o f more than a century ago t o complement downtown h o u s i n g , h i s t o r i c preservation, a n d a reinterpretation of the Tu c s o n Presidio. The Agua Fria River is the site for a project to combine flood
control with recreation and environmental restoration. The Flood Control District of Maricopa County is leading a n effort to put water back in the Agua Fria River. Modeled after the Indian Bend Wash in Scottsdale, the Agua Fria corridor will feature trails and parks to serve the burgeoning West Valley population. Fossil Creek in Gila County began to flow freely again in June 2005. APS decommissioned its dam after using it for decades as a source of hydropower, originally to fuel m i n i n g operations in Jerome. A n alliance among the utility, environmental organizations, and the YavapaiApache Nation made the transformation possible. The San Pedro River, Arizona's only free-flowing river, is the subject of intense, sometimes controversial, preservation efforts. The Upper San Pedro Partnership, a consortium of 21 local, state, and federal agencies and organizations, w o r k s to meet local water needs while protecting the river and surrounding habitat. Flowing water will always be scarce in Arizona. But thanks to these and other efforts, future generations of residents and visitors will be able to enjoy, and to employ, this precious natural resource.
Artist Credit: Jody Pinto and Steve Martino, "Papago Raintree" Phoenix Public Art & Design. Photo Credit: Richard Maack.
P O L I C Y ISSUES R i v e r s in the Desert
P O L I C Y IDEAS
POLICY PRODUCTS
Environmental preservation and restoration Center city revitalization Urban amenities
Re-establish dammed rivers to support recreation, tourism, and quality of life Restrictions on use and pumping Removal of dams
Rio Salado Rio Nuevo City and county ordinances protecting washes
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
47
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
SCHOOL CHOICE
C h a r t e r schools are the centerpiece of Arizona's policies for supporting education choices for students and their parents.
S
The "school choice" movement recently celebrated its f i r s t 50 years. A d v o c a t e s trace the idea back to the thinking of free market economist Milton Friedman. In t h e mid-1950s, h e introduced "choice" a s a way to p r o v i d e educational opportunity for all students -- black and white, rich and poor. The idea captured little attention until the 1970s, however, and did not gain broad acceptance until the 1990s. School choice advocates generally believe:
�
Parents should be able to choose their children's schools. Every child should have access to high quality schools, public or private. Competition, including charter schools, will lead t o greater opportunities and achievement.
�
�
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
48
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
In 1994, the Arizona Legislature authorized the State Board o f Education, t h e State Board of Charter Schools, a n d l o c a l districts to "charter" schools. That same year, the Arizona Department of Education adopted an "open e n r o l l m e n t " p o l i c y, a l l o w i n g parents and students to request to attend any public school in the state. Individual districts responded to the call for choice with alternative and magnet schools to serve students' needs better and differentiate schools from one another. In 1997, Arizona extended its commitment with the nation's first state school choice tax credit. The Arizona Legislature approved a dollar-for-dollar state tax credit for individuals and married couples who donated to "school tuition organizations" that then provide private school scholarships for students. A corporate tuition tax credit was adopted in 2006. But charter schools stand out as Arizona's school choice centerpiece. Charter schools, operated by both for-profit and nonprofit organizations, receive public funds and are accountable for the requirements of their charter, academic p e r f o r m a n c e, a n d fiscal management. H o w e v e r, t h e s e entities have greater decision making authority in areas s u c h as curriculum and pers o n n e l than "regular" p u b l i c schools. In 2005, Arizona counted over 500 charter schools, more than any other state except California. The schools can be found statewide, and educate approximately 10% of Arizona's approximately one million K-12 students.
S C H O O L CHOICE COMPONENT
ARIZONA
NUMBER O F STATES
Charter schools Tuition tax credits for individuals Open enrollment Tuition tax credits for corporations School vouchers
Source: Center for Education Reform.
Yes Yes Yes Yes No
40 3 42 3 5
C h a r t e r schools reflect a wide range of educational a p p r o a c h e s and, o v e r time, p e r f o r m a n c e levels have varied. For example, charter Tempe Preparatory Academy often leads the state's schools in performance, while Community High School in Lake Havasu City is one of the schools closed due to insufficient enrollment or an inadequate academic program. Despite charter schools' growing pains and continuing controversy about their viability and success, however, opportunities for students and parents continue to expand. C h a r t e r schools and other mechanisms have made school choice a significant feature of Arizona's education landscape. After more than a decade, the o n c e unusual idea of putting p a r e n t s ' desires on par with educators' outlooks has become a routine expectation.
P O L I C Y ISSUES S c h o o l Choice
P O L I C Y IDEAS
POLICY PRODUCTS
Student achievement Equal opportunity
Parental choice Competition
Open enrollment Tuition tax credits Charter schools Alternative schools Magnet schools
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
49
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
TRANSPORTATION FOR A REGION
F u e l e d by the public's calls for action, leaders cooperated on a regional transportation plan.
T
In 1985, the Yes on Proposition 300 Committee celebrated a winning initiative campaign for freeway funding. M a r i c o p a County voters had approved a sales tax increase of half a cent for 20 years to speed up freeway building in fast-growing metro Phoenix. But the successf u l campaigners did more than get out the vote for transportation. The seasoned strategists made a major contribution to the growth of regional cooperation in greater Phoenix. Passage of Proposition 400 in 2004 built on the achievements of nearly 20 years before. Freeway construction and regional transportation were hot topics in metro Phoenix as far back as 1960. While transportation needs were unmistakable, many residents and leaders (particularly The Arizona Republic publisher E u g e n e Pulliam) opposed freeways because "Phoenix would become like Los Angeles if freeways were built." I n 1973, v o t e r s rejected a plan to build the Papago Freeway/Red Mountain Freeway from Phoenix to Mesa.
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
50
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
But "Los Angeles-style" traffic enveloped the region even without freeways as more and more people moved to the area. By 1985, Maricopa County voters were ready to tax themselves to finance a comprehensive freeway system. P r o p o s i t i o n 300 backers expected the tax to raise $6 b i l l i o n to build 231 miles of freeway. U n f o r t u n a t e l y, inaccurate cost projections and a drop in tax revenues due to the economic downturn of the late 1980s and early 1990s crippled the plan. Less than 60 freeway miles had been built by 1994. County voters were asked f o r further funds. W h e n a proposal to bail out the Proposition 300 plan was voted down in 1994, Governor Fife Symington stepped in with mechanisms to continue construction of the freeways. By eliminating some of the most costly and controversial segments and utilizing innovative financing, the region's freeway system could be largely completed. The 1985 proposition allocated some money to study mass transit in metro Phoenix. However, when voters soundly defeated the 1989 ValTrans proposal for regional rail and other services and t h e 1994 plan for roads and transit,
individual cities were left to address transit on their own. A patchwork of solutions resulted, with Glendale, Phoenix, Mesa, and Tempe voting tax increases to fund local transit and Chandler and Scottsdale defeating similar measures. A comprehensive, countywide transit solution was still lacking.
A f t e r a lot of planning by the Maricopa Association of Governments and intense negotiations among munici p a l i t i e s, e l e c t e d officials from across metropolitan Phoenix signed on to a regional transportation plan that wa s placed on the ballot as Proposition 400. Vo t e r s p a s s e d the $16 billion measure, w h i c h is based on extending the half-cent sales tax. The package features construction of roads and freeways and transit developm e n t , i n c l u d i n g support for the light rail line into Mesa, Glendale, and Paradise Valley. The Committee to Pass 400 hailed the result as a step forward for transportation and regional cooperation. As Phoenix Mayor Phil Gordon noted after its passage: "We had to come together as a region and make sure e v e r y place benefited...Problems d o n ' t have boundaries and neither should our thinking." Source: Marciopa Association of Governments, 2006.
P O L I C Y ISSUES Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n for a Region
P O L I C Y IDEAS
POLICY PRODUCTS
Inadequate state funding for freeways in Maricopa County Regional transportation demand
Asking voters for sales tax for transportation Regional planning among elected officials
Proposition 300 in 1985 Proposition 400 in 2004
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
51
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
UNIVERSITY SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY INVESTMENTS U
W i t h the passage of Proposition 301, Arizonans said "yes" to investments in science and technology research as a springboard to an increasingly competitive knowledge economy.
Th e economic mantra of Arizona's leaders these days i s "sci-tech," w h i c h is shorthand for the many types o f investments being made in university science and t e c h n o l o g y research. Th e goal is to guide the state's e c o n o m i c development, i m p r o v e its competitiveness, and produce high skill, high wage knowledge economy jobs. These current investments build on years of efforts t o strengthen the state's high technology industries a n d connect innovative companies with university researchers, support systems, and students. Leading thinkers on economic competitiveness have long acknowledged the strong links between top research universities and vibrant technology-based economies. The event that galvanized Arizona's current sci-tech strategy was passage of Proposition 301 in 2000. The statewide b a l l o t measure established a 20-year-long 0.6% state sales tax for the benefit of educational institutions. Most o f the revenue goes to improving K-12 schools, b u t approximately 13% has been set aside for cutting-edge university research. The university share flows through the
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
52
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
Technology and Research Initiative Fund, administered by the Arizona Board of Regents. Over the life of Proposition 301, almost $1 billion will be invested in university science and technology research. The dollars come with a requirement to establish and annually report on specific performance measures. This t y p e of funding -- performance based and targeted f o r university research, e c o n o m i c development, a n d production of high skill workers all at the same time -- had never before been created in Arizona. B u t more funding is only the start of a far-reaching p r o d u c t i v e strategy. To put this money to work and leverage it with federal and industrial grants, new laboratories and support systems are required to complete the environment conducive to significant discoveries and novel technologies. Another major step forward was taken in 2002 with the approval of major research infrastructure i n v e s t m e n t s at Arizona's universities. D e s p i t e a major budget shortfall, state legislators agreed to guarantee over $400 million in new bonding authority so Arizona's universities could construct over a million square feet of state-of-the-art research facilities. One of the lessons learned from other regions is that new economic strategies t a ke time, e s p e c i a l l y those based on scientific research. B u t while Arizonans a c c e p t e d a long time line for research r e s u l t s when they approved Proposition 301, progress has been made.
Proposition 301-supported research at Arizona's universities has already attracted over $300 million in outside grants for research from 2001 to 2005. Among the grants are federal awards of $15 million to find a vaccine for pneumonia, $14 million for research on forest health, $1 million to develop optics capable of detecting hazardous materials in public places, and $10 million for research on ways to assure a safe and secure water supply. During the same time period, more than 130 patents were awarded for new discoveries and inventions developed by Proposition 301 researchers. Proposition 301 has also enabled the state's universities to attract and retain researchers, generate attention for the state's expanding research portfolios, and graduate hundreds of skilled scientists and workers necessary for a dynamic knowledge economy. Th e funding and expectations have also supported collaborative research efforts between universities and such institutions as the Translational Genomics Institute i n Phoenix, M a y o Clinic, Ve t e r a n s ' Administration, a n d U. S. Fo o d and Drug Administration. Th e funds have fostered a new emphasis on the commercialization of university-based discoveries, a process that figures as one of the fundamental catalysts for stimulating economic growth. As almost any Arizona economic leader will say, there is still a long way to go for the state to be in the top tier of science and technology research. But, as they would also say, every journey starts with a single step.
P O L I C Y ISSUES U n i v e r s i t y Science and Technology Investments
P O L I C Y IDEAS
POLICY PRODUCTS
Competitiveness in a knowledge economy
Expanding research capacity and funding Investments in faculty, centers, and students Cross-university collaborations Technology commercialization
Proposition 301 University facility funding "Angel investors'" tax credit
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
53
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
VERY IMPORTANT CHIPS
S e m i c o n d u c t o r s and their forerunners have played a major part in the creation of "high tech" sectors in Arizona's economy. In turn, public policies helped create an environment friendly to technology.
V
" Ve r y Important Chips" r e f e r s to the impact of the semiconductor manufacturing industry in Arizona and the public policies that have supported it. The industry is part of more than 50 years of state economic history and remains "Arizona's most important technology sector." K n o w n at the time as an agriculture and mining state, t h e Phoenix and Tucson areas experienced economic booms during World War II with the establishment of military bases and defense industries. But the end of the wa r spelled economic trouble as wartime industries began to shut down or threatened to do so. In response, p o l i t i c a l and business leaders set out to bring more m a n u f a c t u r i n g jobs to the state. A d v o c a t e s for the growing tourism industry were prominent among those
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
54
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
expressing a preference for clean, smoke- and pollutionfree industries that would have minimum impact on the natural environment. As it happened, international events helped. The dawn o f the Cold War and the build up to the Korean War created work for electronics manufacturers. In the late 1940s, Phoenix caught the attention of one of these -- the Motorola Company founded in Chicago by Paul V. Galvin in 1928. In 1949, Motorola R&D leader Dan Noble created a small research and development operation in P h o e n i x that was devoted to military electronics and soon enough semiconductors. In 1956, Burr-Brown began in Tucson and played a part in technology from vacuum tubes to transistors to semiconductors. M o t o r o l a , B u r r- B r o w n , a n d other companies served a s catalysts for other firms. B y the 1950s, t h e list of c o m p a n i e s engaged wholly or in part in electronics in Arizona included Motorola, AiResearch, General Electric, Goodyear Air Craft, Kaiser Aircraft and Electronics, and S p e r r y. I n the early 1980s, I n t e l , t h e world's largest producer of computer chips, joined the list. Semiconductor manufacturing is only part of the "chip" story. Research and development and myriad services related to the field have also spurred economic growth. In addition, the sector has encouraged a broader "high tech" industry.
Today semiconductor manufacturing employs more than 24,000 Arizonans. Defense electronics accounts for 8,100 more workers. Semiconductors also figure prominently in the state's high tech exports, which totaled $6.4 billion in 2004 and accounted for almost half of all state exports. Th e s e numbers would most likely not have gotten so large without some of Arizona's ideas. For example, semiconductors would not have continued to thrive without t h e many public policies related to water supply and management. Tax policies have played a part. In addition, Arizona's universities and community colleges responded to calls for more skilled workers and tailored programs to t h e electronics and semiconductor industries. Va r i o u s communities over time have embarked on "quality of life" initiatives from downtown redevelopment to expansion of arts, culture, and libraries to be more attractive to technology firms and their employees. Regional and state economic development efforts have targeted these firms. In 2005, the Arizona Legislature passed the "sales factor" tax incentive to encourage Intel to choose Chandler for another "fab," which the global firm did. Over half a century, strong connections have grown between the public and the private s e c t o r s to support not just "very i m p o r t a n t chips," b u t to nurture a wide variety of technologybased firms.
P O L I C Y ISSUES Ve r y Important Chips
P O L I C Y IDEAS
POLICY PRODUCTS
Competitive regional and state economies Creation and retention of high wage jobs
Support for major manufacturers and related firms Quality of life Favorable business climate
University and industry partnerships Water management Tax incentives
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
55
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
WALK ON THE ARIZONA TRAIL
A n Arizona hiker's dream is close to becoming an 800-mile reality, as public and private organizations and volunteers construct the Utah-to-Mexico Arizona Trail.
W
Nearly one out of five American adults say they like to hike. For these established adventurers, and the many m o r e who discover the great outdoors every year, A r i z o n a has a monumental challenge -- more than 800 miles of hiking from the border with Utah to the border with Mexico. The state-supported Arizona Trail is part of a national trails movement, but it started as one backpacker's idea. F l a g s t a f f schoolteacher Dale Shewalter envisioned a c o n t i n u o u s thread stitching together many of the s t a t e 's unique habitats and natural wonders. I n 1985, a f t e r scouting the length of Arizona for such a route, Shewalter convinced the Arizona State Parks Board to e n d o r s e his project. Th r e e years later, f o u r national forests in Arizona provided funding for work to begin. Appropriately, Shewalter became the Arizona Trail's first
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
56
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
"steward." In 1988, builders completed the initial sevenmile segment on the Kaibab Plateau. Today, less than two d e c a d e s later, t h e trail is approximately 90% complete. What Shewalter didn't foresee, however, is how the trail would stitch together more than just landscapes. It also connects a dizzying variety of people and institutions, from major corporations and government agencies to trail volunteers and recreational groups. The official Arizona Trail Partners -- land managers who formally agreed to cooperate on the trail -- include four counties, one city, two state agencies, one private corporation, and ten federal entities. In addition, the nonprofit Arizona Trail Association, formed in 1994 to help coordinate trail c o n s t r u c t i o n and maintenance, c o n s i s t s of hundreds more volunteers, outdoor organizations, and public and private donors. While the work of improving and maintaining the trail will go on, the basic route is approaching completion. But this marks just another beginning: The next step already underway is to gain Congressional recognition as a National Scenic Trail alongside the Appalachian, Pacific Crest, American Discovery, and seven others. Ten other states boast trans-state trails, but Gary Werner, executive director of the Partnership f o r National Scenic and Historic Trails, s a y s the Arizona Trail offers greater d i v e r s i t y than any comparable route in t h e U.S. S o far, i t traverses 12 different life zones and climbs from 1,700 feet to
T h e Arizona Trail
Source: Arizona Trail Association.
9,600 feet in elevation. Along the way, it crosses seven mountain ranges, four rivers, five lakes, three national parks, four national forests, and two towns. The Arizona Trail provides a backbone that links d o z e n s of other state trail systems. Fo r anyone who wants to walk, it offers one v e r y long trek and a unique view of Arizona's many landscapes.
P O L I C Y ISSUES Wa l k on the Arizona Trail
P O L I C Y IDEAS
POLICY PRODUCTS
Support for recreation and tourism Appreciation of Arizona's diverse environment
Collaboration among state, federal, and local agencies to develop and maintain a state-long hiking trail Public involvement in trail development and maintenance
Arizona Trail
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
57
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
XERISCAPE
B a c k e d by city ordinances and municipal associations, xeriscaping is widely promoted and often required in Arizona, resulting in water-wise stewardship that works to reduce consumption and celebrate the desert environment.
X
V a l u e s have changed in Arizona. I n earlier times, newcomers who wanted to "make the desert bloom" looked most often to non-native crops and landscape plants. This practice may have made Arizona feel more like "back home," but it also increased water consumption. I n fact in the 1950s and 1960s, " d e s e r t landscaping" wa s not in vogue. I t was often a pejorative term that m e a n t just colored gravel and a cactus or two. B u t in t h e last 30-40 years, A r i z o n a n s have changed their outlooks and, with the help of many expert landscape a r c h i t e c t s, d e s i g n e r s, a n d contractors, t h e state has evolved a sophisticated palette of plant alternatives and ideas about landscapes. Of course, much more remains t o be done for landscaping and water use to be in complete harmony with nature, but as a result of public choices and public policies, landscapes are becoming "xeriscapes." The word combines "xeros," which means " d r y " i n Greek, a n d landscape. Th e result refers to specific principles of landscape design, planting -- with an emphasis on native plants -- and maintenance to
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
58
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
r e d u c e water consumption and yard trimmings. S i n c e approximately half of household water use is f o r landscapes, r e d u c i n g outside water use is a key c o n s e r v a t i o n technique. I n 1981, t h e Denver Water Department coined the term "xeriscape" in response to a drought. Since then, Arizona and a number of other Western states have adopted the policies and practices created in Colorado. Th e City of Tucson enacted a xeriscape ordinance in 1991, which applied to new multifamily, commercial, and industrial development. The ordinance requires the u s e of drought-tolerant plants and limits those not suited to the environment. In addition, landscaped areas m u s t be designed "to take advantage of s t o r m water runoff and the use of waterconserving irrigation systems is required." I n turn, t h e City of Phoenix outlines minimum landscaping standards for multif a m i l y dwellings, w h i c h include incorporating waterless features a n d drought-resistant vegetation. Many other Arizona cities have taken
s i m i l a r steps, c o o r d i n a t e d by the Arizona Municipal Water Users Association. These cities also work to educate homeowners about water conservation. For example, Tucson's water department, in cooperation with the Pima County Cooperative Extension Office, offers workshops on how to use native plants and desert-adapted plants in landscaping. Phoenix residents can take advantage of irrigation and landscaping workshops offered by the city's water department in conjunction with Desert Botanical Gardens. Residents can also order free literature on xeriscaping from the city's website. X e r i s c a p e principles are a strategy that everyone c a n participate in and public policies supporting t h e m are continuing to spread. A s Arizona c i t i e s have shown with reductions in per capita water consumption, xeriscaping results in more sustainable habitats and more ecologically c o n s c i o u s inhabitants who are w i l l i n g to live and work with the a r i d land, r a t h e r than replace it.
P O L I C Y ISSUES Xeriscape
P O L I C Y IDEAS
POLICY PRODUCTS
Water conservation
Landscaping standards suitable to the desert e n v i ro n m e n t
Municipal xeriscape ordinances Public information campaigns Classes for homeowners and professional landscapers
Morrison Institute for Public Policy
59
A R I Z O N A IDEAS: Policies from A-Z
YOURS, MINE, AND OU
Arizona State Agency Publications
