State of Arizona Project S.L.I.M. report on the State Land Department

              I
/..,,- l-
I
I
I'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I'
I
I
I
I
STATE OF ARIZONA
PROJECT S. LI. M. REPORT ON THE
STATE LAND DEPARTMENT
JlJy 2, 1992
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
STATE LAND DEPARTMENT - PROJECT SUM
TABLE OF CONTENTS
fA( g
EXECl11lVE SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1
RECOMMENDAnONS
Nehpl RMotIcM DMBion
Coding tor Multiple Leases 18
Hydrology Section 20
OoeraIioras DIvision
Applications to Place Improvements 24
Adrnnmatiun DIvision
Data Processing 47
Multi- year Rental Agreements 51
Forestry DIvision
Forestry DMsion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 54
Urban PIamilg
Urban Planning - Stages Consolidation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 58
Urban Planning Restructure 69
YJnd DiscoslioilS
Brokerage Fees 72
Rights- Of- Way Applications Umlts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 78
LandExchange~ rization 90
Agency Lease Calculations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 99
Policy and Procedures Manuals 101
P'I!-~==~-.= ...='-'~ r==.'. o.""-= = A ~~=~_-.= , == d """==.=~="=~ ~ nl')
nuul wall~ LIVII VI ~' Gn' '- G11U ""' G.- ILl! IGIIL ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• •" w
STATE LAND DEPARTMENT - PROJECT SUM
TABLE OF CONTENTS
( Continued)
EXHIBITS
1. SUM Interview Ust - State Land Department ( SLD) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 9
2. Current Organization Chart - SLD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 11
3. Summary of Titles and Savings - SLD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 12
4. Summary of Position Savings - SLD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 14
5. Proposed Organization Chart - SLD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 15
6. Implementation Schedule - SLD 16
7. Current Hydrology DMsion Organization Chart 23
8. Application to Place Improvement Upon State Land . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 27
9. Report of Improvement Placed With Prior Approval 35
10. Report of Improvement WIthout Prior Approval 40
11. Applications to Place Improvements - Present Process Row Chart 45
12. Applications to Place Improvement - Proposed Process Row Chart 46
13. Current Forestry DMsion Organization Chart 57
14. Current Oassification Planning Process Row Chart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 60
15. Urban Planning DMsion - General Planning Process Row Chart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 62
16. Proposed Urban Planning DMsion - Combined Stages Planning Process Row Chart 63
17. Article 5.1 Urban Lands Development - A. R. S. 37- 331.01; 333 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 64
18. House BUI 2524 - State Land Sales; Broker Participation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 75
19. State Land Department Memorandum, 3/ 20/ 92 82
20. Right- of- Way Instruction and Application . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 84
21. House Concurrent Resolution 2029 - State Land Exchange Authority 93
22. State Trust Lands Eligible for Exchange 95
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
July 2,1992
Mr. M. Jean Hassell
Commissioner
State Land Department
1616 W. Adams Street
Phoenix, Arizona 85007
Dear Commissioner Hassell:
The Governor's Project SUM review of your agency has been completed, and the project team
is pleased to present you with this summary of our findings and recommendations. The study was initiated
on March 3. 1992 and the field work was completed approximately March 25, 1992.
This summary restates the objectives of the review and the approach which was used, and it
highlights the major changes recommended as a result of the study. It quantifies the potential benefits for
your agency and the public at large while summarizing the key implementation actions and legislative
support needed to convert the potential Into actual benefits. The summary Is followed by the detailed
findings and recommendations.
In total, the recommendations identify apprOXimately $ 5.574,224 In benefits for your agency.
OBJECTlVES & GOALS
The overall objective of this study was to find ways to Improve the delivery of services in the
State Land Department ( SLD). The goals were to Improve the process of delivering public services and
reduce the cost of government whenever and wherever possible. Impediments to prompt and effective
services were to be identified and removed, and structures established which support the long- term goal
of continuous Improvement using total quality management concepts throughout the agency.
APPROACH
We reviewed the shelf data from your Department to understand the mission, responsibilities, and
workloads. Interviews were conducted with all levels of supervision and selected technlc. aJ and c1eric., a1
positions. We observed work activities and computer system use, and obtained actual or estimated work
Mr. H. Jean Hassell, Commissioner
State Land Department
Page 2
measurement standards for the processes which were reviewed. We discussed procedural findings with
work center managers and supervisors.
exhibit 1, Interview Ust, lists the 38 Individuals we contacted during the review. Many of these
Individuals were contacted more than once to confirm our understanding of their areas of responsibility and
to discuss the feaslbHity of proposed process changes and structures. Because of their cooperation and
participation, the study team and your managers have a high level of confidence that these
recommendations can be successfully Implemented.
exhibit 2, Current Organization Chart, shows the structure of the Department as It was presented
to us at the time of the review. Changes may have occurred during and since our review, and should be
reviewed as part of the Implementation process.
S, UMMARY ANDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS
Major potential savings come from combining Units or Sections where there Is duplication or
fragmentation of workload, and from smoothing out the flow of documentations and work processes
currently utUized by the Department. Many of these concepts were those proposed to the SUM Team by
yourself and members of your staff. The SUM Team is appreciative of your cooperation.
Nphpi R8SOlI'Ce DIvision
In the Range Section, we recommend combining the multiple leases which have resulted from
range lease expansions over the years, each of which were assigned a new lease number. Actual
anticipated savings have not been calculated, but elimination of duplication will result in staff time savings,
freeing them for attention to other agency activities and details.
In the Hydrology Section, we recommend eliminating one vacant position in the Administration
sub- Sectlon, and two vacant positions be retained for the pending " Stream Bed" legislation.
We recommend eliminating three filled positions In the Hydrology administration sub- Section
when computerization Is completed. This Is based on the Information that half of the water management
records have been computerized, and the other half will be computerized by the end of fiscal 1993.
I
I,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
' I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I'
I
I
I
I
' I
I
Mr. H. Jean Hassell, Commissioner
State Land Department
Page 3
We also recommend relocating the technical sub- Sectlon of Hydrology to a newly formed
- Resource Protection DMslon" as shown In the proposed organization chart ( see exhibit 5, Proposed
Organizational Chart, SLD). This will eliminate the need tor one of the two present supervisors, and we
therefore recommend eliminating one supervisor position. All of these recommendations will result In a
savings of $ 207,669 In the Hydrology Section.
The Implementation of these recommendations will require some new management procedures
and transferring of positions, together with expediting the computerization of the water records management.
QperaIiorIS DIvIsion
In the Operations DMsion, major savings are avaUabie by revising the process for submitting
" Applications to Place Improvements" and similar actMtles. We recommend simplification of this process,
with signature authority delegated to the responsible administering DMslon.
In the Business Systems Section, we recommend a reorganization, which Involves eliminating
one presently vacant position, expanding the data processing services to the Department which are currently
planned, and transferring staff ( many In accord with the agccy's already planned moves) to other Sections.
We also recommend abolishing two positions scheduled to be transferred. This will provide better tools for
the Department and cost avoidance and reductions of approximately $ 49,900.
WIthin the Forestry Fiscal Section we recommend establishment of multi- year service and
equipment provision contracts, some possibly with community representative " slngle- contact" sources, to
eliminate the annual exercise of setting up partially- used contracts with large numbers of Individual providers.
Consequent savings tor both the agency and the public are anticipated, together with Improved service
delivery, planning and public relations.
Mr. H. Jean Hassell, Commissioner
State Land Department
Page 4
Fonwtry DIvision
Combining dispatching services via an Inter- Govemmental Agreement with the federal Bureau
of Land Management ( BLM), was explored, to determine If It would provide Increased efficiency for the
Department, Improved response to fire emergencies, better accounting for dispatched services, and savings
to both agencies. BLM has rejected the concept, so savings amount to Just one vacant position, from
$ 27,000.
Urban PIam!! g DIvision
In this small Division we recommend an Improved planning stage process, by which staff time
can be reduced in accomplishing the preparation of large blocks of Trust Land for disposition or utilization.
That improvement, combined with an overall evaluation of the size of the tasks now needing on- going
planning, result in a recommendation for reorganization of these functions by transfer to a Section status
within a new Resource Protection Division, and a resultant savings of approximately $ 254,600.
Land Disoostion Division
Three areas of concem are addressed for this Division, the first being the use of brokers when
advantageous to the State.
The second is diminishing the complexity of the process of granting uncontested rights- of- way
for public agency roads use. An amendment of A. R. S. 37- 132, and the Attomey General's approval of
related Rules changes Is required to accomplish this, with an expected $ 35,000 minimal savings, plus
expedited service to the agency's customers.
The third area Is in the land exchange program, which requires passage of a referendum by the
electorate on the 1992 ballot. Success for this action can be enhanced If the public Is adequately educated
about the benefits, Including adding useable land valued In excess of $ 200 milion and annual Income
approximating $ 5 mUlion for the next five years.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
, I
I
I
' I
I
GENERAL OBSERVADONS
SUMMARY OF SAVINGS
exhibit 4, Summary of Position Savings, shows how the recommendations would impact the
various dMsions and major sections of SLD. As Indicated In the exhibits, the staffing recommended for SLD
Mr. H. Jean Hassell, Commissioner
State Land Department
Page 5
$ 5,000,000
$ 81,234
S 492,990
$ 5574224
Cost Avoidance
Cost Reduction
Total:
Income Enhancement
( Average $ 5 mUlion per
year over the period of
five years)
The Project SUM Team's recommendations, and the accompanying exhibits which describe
them, are based on the situation as It was described and explained at the time of the Interviews and
analyses. Some of the recommendations which are being submitted by the SUM Team may already be In
the process of being Implemented. Others may be altered In the final analysis because the context of the
recommendations has been changed since they were prepared.
Implementation leadership will determine the achievement of maximum savings by putting In
place the concepts proposed In this document, and resolving any differences which exist due to Interim
changes In the organization.
exhibit 3, Summary of Titles and Savings, shows the Impact of each of the recommendations,
and includes enhanced Income avoidance of future costs and reduction of present costs. The magnitude
of each Is:
The improved services and benefits outlined above are achieved through the 14 points discussed
In this report. The recommendations apply to several areas such as organization restructuring, process
changes, Income enhancement, management controls, functional realignment, work measurement, public
benefits, and staffing requirements.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1\
I
Mr. H. Jean Hassell, Commissioner
State Land Department
Page 6
totals 163, as opposed to 178 currently shown In the Department's organization chart, for a reduction of 15
positions, of which five were vacant at the time of our review.
exhibit 5, Proposed Organization Chart, shows the proposed structure of SLD following the
Implementation of these recommendations. This structure Is consistent with the recommendations, but Is
not the only possible structure which can achieve the Improved service and benefits. The actual structure
Implemented will be finalized as these recommendations are Implemented.
IMPlEMENTATION
Implementation Is the critical step in the process of achieving savings. Potential savings are often
identified but not achieved when the implementation process Is distracted by day to day activities, and
managers shy away from the necessary reduction In staff. Successful Implementations are marked by two
things:
• A strong commitment from senior management to achieve as much of the savings as
proves possible, and
• Designation of Implementation team leaders with the requisite mental toughness to see the
task through to completion.
The implementation process Is best carried on soon after the review process. This maintains
momentum whUe the topics are fresh In people's minds. We estimate that most of the recommendations
contained In the report can be Implemented within a period of 24 months.
The Brokerage Fee recommendation requires legislative approval of HB 2524, and the land
exchange authorization wUl need approval of HeR 2029 and voter approval on the fall ballot. The simplified
Rights- of- Way application procedure will require new legislation.
Recommendations which may require development of Administrative Rules and Regulations,
under the present Arizona state procedures for these, will take longer.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
il
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
: 1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Mr. H. Jean Hassell, Commissioner
State Land Department
Page 7
Our recommended Implementation Plan In exhibit 6. Implementation Schedule. shows an
Implementation sequence and approximate duration for each recommendation. A detaUed plan should be
established at the outset of Implementation. Individual recommendation Implementation requirements are
shown with the recommendation in the detaU section of this report.
There are three major components of cost associated with Implementation. These are typically
one- tlme costs and represent a reduction In first year benefits. They Include the costs of current employee
time during Implementation, outside assistance, and employee redeployment. Outside Implementation
assistance can significantly Improve the total value of benefits achieved, the probability that benefits will be
achieved. and can reduce the total time necessary to achieve implementation through the use of focused,
dedicated resources. These costs depend on the total scope of the assistance requested, and are not
Included in this Individual agency report.
* * * * *
Mr. H. Jean Hassell, Commissioner
State Land Department
PageS
We wish to thank you as the Commissioner of SLD and your entire staff for their complete
cooperation, participation, suggestions and comments, and support of our efforts during this study.
We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to the Governor and the SUM Steering Committee
In this endeavor. Should you have any questions regarding this report please feel free to contact the Project
executive or any member of your Project SUM Team.
Las Jennings, Department of Youth Treatment & RehabHltation
Amjad Huda, Coopers & Lybrand
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
il
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I:
I
I
I
I
I
I
I,
I
I
I
I
SUM INTERVIEW UST
Name QIt §
Jean Hassell Commissioner March 3, 1992
Glendon Collins Deputy Commissioner March 3, 1992
Lynn Larson Olr., Admlnlstr./ RAD March 3, 1992
Bob Hesse N/ R Manager III March 4, 1992
Jerry Baker Fiscal Servo Manager II March 4, 1992
Pete Villareal Fiscal Servo Spec. I March 5, 1992
Edith Swain Fiscal Servo Spec. I March 5, 1992
Paulette Lowe EOP Sys. Proj. Manager March 5, 1992
Gary Irish EOP Sys. Proj. Mgr. jGIS March 5,1992
Robert Young Olr., Natural Resource Oiv. March 5, 1992
Richard Oxford Olr., Operations OMsion March 6, 1992
Roy Myhlhousen Forestry Fiscal Mgr.; ASO II March 6, 1992
Marlene Riggs M. I. S.- Oata Mgmnt. Unlt March 6, 1992
Dee Fuerst Prog. Oir., Hydro & W. R. March 6, 1992
Cynthia Stefanovic Supervisor, Water Resources March 6, 1992
Michael Anabel Grazing Lease Administrator March 9, 1992
V. Chatupron Manager, Drainage/ Hydrology March 9,1992
Michael Rice Manager, Minerai Section March 9, 1992
Nlkl Hansen Director, Urban Planning Oiv. March 9, 1992
Gregg Keller Planner III, Urban Planning March 9, 1992
Melinda lewis Planner III, Urban Planning March 9, 1992
Lora Moody Admlnlst. Secty, Urb. Planng March 9, 1992
BUI Dowdle Olr., EnvironjTrespass Oiv. March 9, 1992
BII Warskaw Land Mgr. II; NRCO Section March 10, 1992
Merv Mason Admln. Proced./ lnfo. Mngmnt. March 11, 1992
Beverly Francy Manager, Titles & Contracts Section March 11,1992
Uonel Blair M_ ar.. Ella_ ln99r1n_ n M~-- n- rn- rl- n-- ng ~- A- r-"- t- l- n- n- ~ rch 12, 1992
SLD - 9
EXHIBIT 1
Page 1 of 2
Mike Hart
Robert Celaya
Dave Behrens
Scott Hunt
Bill Fish
WUiam Foster
Jean Morris
Barry Stallings
AI Dickie
Ron Ruzlska
John Feltman
J. Russ Cisco
SUM INTERVIEW UST
Director, Forestry Div.
Natural Resource Manager II
Land Manager I
Natural Resource Manager II
Mgr., Rights- of- Way Section
Dir., Land Disposition Div.
Nat. Resource Mgr., III; RfW
Mgr., Sales Sec.; Land Disp.
Mgr., Commer Sec.; Land Disp.
Land Mgr. l, Commerc. Section
Mgr., Appraisal Section
Appraiser III
SLD - 10
March 16. 1992
March 16, 1992
March 16, 1992
March 16, 1992
March 20, 1992
March 23,1992
March 23,1992
March 23, 1992
March 23,1992
March 23,1992
March 24, 1992
March 24, 1992
EXHIBIT 1
Page 2 of 2
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
il
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
' I
I
I
- - - .. -. - - .. - - ... - - - .. - - - -
CURRENT ORGANIZATION CHART EXHIBIT 2
STATE LAND DEPARTMENT
COIIIIISSIONER'S TOTAL FTE•• 178
OFFICE
< 4
6
LEGISLATIVE
LIAISON
1
29 r- 37 I 37 I 28 11 I 25 I 6 I
FDOIVREISSITORNV NATUDRAIVLISRIEOSNOURCES AADNMALINY. SI& S DREIVSOISUIROCNE ODPEIVRAISTIIOONNSS UR8ADJIlV. I. SLIAONNNING LANDDDIVISISI" IOOSNITION ENDVIIRVOISIIIIOIENNTAL
4 2 5 2 8 3 6
FORESTRY IlIICD ACCOUNTING TITLE & LTUCSON U.... COIIIIERCIAL
I- NGln I- SECTION I- SECTION I- CONTRACT SECTION ..... SECTION
3 3 8 SECTION ,. 2 9
£; noS] RANGE FORESTRY ADMIN. " ReeD. SALES
.•.. I- NGln I- SECTION I- F'SCAL l- I INFO l- SECTION ... 6 8 Sl:: CTION < 4 3.5 SECTION 8 6
.. HOEUX HYDROLOGY BUSINESS A.... RAISAL RIGHTS- OF-I-
DISTRICT l- SECTION I- SYSTENS I- SECTION L.- WAY SECTION
OFFII: E 1 18 SECTION 13 7 7
12.5
FLA05" AI'F NINERAL CON.. UTER AFPRAISAL
I- DISTRICT '- SECTION I- OPERATOR ..... REVIEW UNIT
OFFI:: E 7 6 SECTION 3 1
'~! J GIS
I- DISTRICT ..... SECTION
OFFI:: E < 4 5
PRESC: ITT
l- DISTR, CT
OFFIGE 2
L- DPISIIRN'ICTE[ J
OFFI': E 2
AH010
Ql111119?
en
6 I
.... I\)
STATE LAND DEPARTMENT SUMMARY OF TITLES & SAVINGS
Agency I Total I Federal I State
Total Revenue Avoided Saved FTE Vacant evenu Avoided Saved FTE Vacant evenu Avoided saved FTE Vacant
I Rae I Recommendation Title Enhance Cost Cost FTE nhanc Cost Cost FTE nhanc Cost Cost FTE
1 Coding For Multiple Leases 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 Hydrology Section 207,669 0 37,976 169.693 4 1 37,976 169.693 4 1
3 Appllcatllons To Place Improvement 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 Data Processing • 49.893 0 16.258 33,635 2 1 16.258 33.635 2 1
5 MUIll- Year Rental Agreements 0 0 0 0 0 0
6 Forestry Division 27,000 0 27,000 0 0 1 27.000 1
7 Stages Consolidation 46,565 0 0 46,565 1 0 46,565 1
8 Urban Planning Restructure 208,097 0 0 208,097 4 0 208.097 4
9 Brokerage Fees 0 0 0 0 0 0
10 Rlghts- ol- Way Appllc. 35,000 0 0 35,000 1 0 35,000 1
11 Land Exchanges 5.000,000 5.000,000 0 0 0 o .......
12 Agency Lease Calculations 0 0 0 0 0 0
13 Polley & Procedures Manuals 0 0 0 0 0 0
14 ReorganIzation of SLD 0 0 0 0 0 0
J
J Land Subtotal' .•. .>.......•.•.•• » •.•/. 5.574,224 5.000.000 · 81,234 492.990 ...... 12 3 ••••••• 27.000 .... 0 0 // ..... / J / 0 · · · • · · · · · · · · · · 54; 234 .492,990 » · 12 2
- - - - -- - - - - - .. - - .. .. - -
~
m
o
" 11
I\) -
~
OJ
= 4
Co) -
- - - - ~, .. .. .. - - .. - - .. '.. - - - -
en
6 ... (,,)
I-- Other ------ 1--- 1- OneTime- Statute Rule Computer Months
Revenue Avoided Saved FTE Vacant Public One Time One Time Change Change Program
IRec I Fiecommendatlon Title Enhance Cost Cost FTE Total Savings Cost
1 Codlnj;, For Multiple Leases
2 Hydro!: lOY Section X
3 Appii" e'llllons To Place Improvement
4 Data Frocesslng 12
5 Mulll-" ear Rental Agreements
6 Foresl'y DIvision ~ 2
7 Stagei, Consolidation X 6
8 Urban' Planning Restructure 12
9 Brokel age Fees
10 Rlgt~ · or- Way Appllc. X 3
11 Land Exchanges X 18
12 Agenc'l Lease Calculallons
13 Polil: y , Procedures Manuals
14 Reorg! mlzatlon 01 SLD
PP
Land ~, ublotal < i>' i » ,>:':. n ' » '>, 0 0 0 0 0 ': » Oi 0 « / i · . · : · ': · i
~ m
I\)
o
."
I\)
~
OJ
= i
(,,)
SUMMARYOFPOSITION SAVINGS -- SLD
CURRENT RECOMMENDED REMAINING
CHANGE
Admin. lRes. Anal. 37 - 3.5 33.5
Natural Resources 37 - 8 29
Forestry 29 - 1 28
Operations 28 0.5 28.5
Urban Planning 10 - 10 0
Environmental 6 - 6 0
Land Disposition 25 - 1 24
Resource Protection 0 14 14
Commissioner 6 0 6
TOlals > 178 .> ~ · · » >": 15 · ..
...... < 163
SLO - 14
EXHIBIT 4
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
, I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
- - - .. - - .. - .. - - .. - - - - - - -
I 6 I
.... en
PROPOSED ORGANIZATION CHART
STATE LAND DEPARTMENT
COMIIISSIONEII TOTAL FTEs 163
2
AOIlINISTIIATIVE LEGISLATIVE
SECIIETARY LIAISON
III 1 1
DEPUTY
CDIlMISSIONEII
1
ADMINISTMTIVE
SECIIETAIIY
II 1
I 14 I 33.5 I 29 I 28.5 I 24 I
IlESOUIICE ADMIII. MATUML LAIlO
PROTECTION PROCEOUIIE ! i"" IIESOUIICES OPI! MTIOIlS DISPOSJT10115 FORESTRY
2 RECORDS 5 2 2 3 4
H'ottO TITLE FORESTIIY
'- TECH - ACCOUNT 1110 f- MIlClE - & - LEAS1110 f- MANAGEMENT
3 8 8 CONTIIACT ,. 9 2
I! IlVIR. FORESTIIY TECH. FIIIE
!- TIIESPASS - FISCAL f- II. R. C. D. f- SUPPORT - SALES - IIANAGEIlEIIT
4 3. S 3 2 6 6
- MAPPIIlO ( 4) DISTIIICT OFFICES
URBAN - IIECORDS ( 2) IIIGHT- OF- - PLANNIIlO f- 11.1.5. ,.- MIIIEML "- WAY - - PHOENIX ( 1)
5 ,. 6 6
f- APPMISALS
- TUCSON ( 4)
7.5 - FLAGSTAFF
( 7)
A. L. R. J. S. -
'-- G. 1. S. !- HYDIIOLooy - PINETOP ( 2)
7 6
- APPRREAVISIEAWLS I - P( 2ilE) SCOTT
1
EXHIBIT 5
, -----
AH015
0~/ 06/ 92
- - .. -
STATE LAND DEPARTMENT IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
( PRELIMINARY) EXHIBIT 8
TITLE I MONTHS PAGE 1 OF 2
MONTHS I 1 - 2 I 3 - 4 I S - 6 I 7 - II I 9 - 1. I 11 - 12 I 13 - 14 I 15- 16 I 17 - III I 19 - 2. I 21 - U I n - 24 I 25 - 26 I
NATURAL IIE50tlllCES
' RE - IM'LEMEMTATION ' IIE'ARATION - 1. CODING FOIl MULTI'LE LEASING I
I I
2. HYDROLOGY SECTION I
crERATIONS DIVISION
3. ~ LICATIONS TO ' LACE I~ ROVENENTS I
6 I
- 0)
ADMINISTRATION DIVISION
4. DATA ' IIOCESSING I
5. MULTI- YEAII RENTAL AGREEMENTS I
FORESTIIY DIVISION
6. FORESTRY DIVISION I
AHSL01
01/ 23/ 92
~. - - - ==== - - - -
- - - .. - ...... - - ... - - - - _... -
STATE LAND DEPARTMENT IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE EXHIBIT fJ ( PRELIMINARY)
TITLE I MONTHS PAGE 2 OF2
MONTHS I 1 - 2 I 3 - 4 I S - 6 I 7 - 8 I 9- ,. I 11 - 12 I 13 - 14 I lS- 16 I 17 - 18 1,9 - ze I 21 - U III - 14 lIS - I' I
URIII'. N I'LANNINO
7. STAGES CONSOLlDATlOII, I
8. URBAN I'LANNINO REST~ UCTURE I
I
LAND DISI'OSITION
t. IIIOKERAOI! FEES I t•• RIINTS- OF-' AY AI'I'LIC4TION LIMITS I I
I I
11. LAIID IXCIfAIlClES I
6 •
........,
GENERAL R, r, COIINENDATIONS
12. AGENCY LEASE CALCULA!; IONS I
I
13. I'OLICY AND I'ROCEDURE" 1 NANIIALS I
I
14. REORGANIZATION OF STinE LAND DEI'ARTMENT I
AHSLD2
04/ 23/ 92
ctOQING FOR MlA. DPl£ LEASES
The Range Section's overall responslbllty Is to process new and renewal grazing lease
applications, annual blllngs, land treatment and range Improvement applications, and enforce compliance.
At present, when a rancher leases additional land for grazing. his application Is processed like a
new application, and Is assigned a new code or lease number. Further, at the time of renewal, the rancher
receives another bUI and Is maled another questionnaire for that additional piece of land.
By handling the same lessee through two different codes or lease numbers, the State Land
Department Is duplicating efforts In terms of processing new applications. re- bBling during renewal and
maUing a separate questionnaire. There are about 1,600 lessees and 160 are renewed fNery year, as each
lease must be renewed fN8ry 10 years. If the old leases for the same lessees are combined, the number
of leases could drop by about 400, down to 1,200 which will leave about 120 leases to be renewed fNery
year.
Grazing fees are based on a formula set by statute which Is based on the number of animals run
on the land. This formula Is known as " AUM" ( Animal Unit Months). The same fee Is applicable to all
grazing lease lands, regardless of when they are leased.
The term for grazing leases Is 10 years. Therefore. a lease contracted at a later date Is due later.
HowfNer, by renewing at an earlier date In those Instances In which an additional lease has been acqUired,
combining the two Into one lease and pro- ratlng the cost on the original to the new renewal date. the lessee
and SLD will save time and money. as opposed to having to fHe, track. process and renew two separate
leases.
We recommend elimination of the dUplication of efforts through the following:
SLD - 18
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
• Amend the existing lease under the same code or lease when additional land Is leased by
the same lessee number and maintain one file for one lessee
• Consolidate and combine all the old leases which belong to the same lessee Into one lease.
• No duplication
• Savings for the time of about 40 lease renewal processlngs annually. ( T'he actual cost has
not been quantified, as It will require a time study, which could be done during
Implementation)
• Savings of preparing 40 fewer bills and 40 fewer mailings ( time, material and postage ­certified
mail).
Even though the total savings do not equate to one FTE In this particular process, savings from
other processes of this nature could add up to actual budget savings.
• Consolidate and combine all the old leases which belong to the same lessee into one lease
• Time: 6 months.
SLD - 19
HYDROLOGy SECDON
The Hydrology Section has two sub- sections: Administration and Technical. The administrative
side Is responsible for:
• Water rights records management
• Contractual water management
• Well management
• Water claims analysis and defense pursuant to the adjudication
• Grandfathered groundwater rights management
• Irrigation Districts Interaction
• Bureau of Land Management ( BLM) exchanges ( which the Attorney General believes are no
longer legal)
• Other miscellaneous activities.
The technical side is responsible for technical prcff'sses and for the review of technical documents
to support the Appraisals. Sales, Rights- of- Way, and Commercial Lease Sections; and the Environmental and
Urban Planning DMslons. This is done through assessing conditions of land. water systems, drainage and.
In emergency situations, coordinating with federal Improvement projects with the Federal Emergency
Management Agency ( FEMA).
The administrative side has 11 FlEs, of which three are vacant and one Is a limited term position
which wDl be deleted by September, 1992 ( see Exhibit 7, Hydrology Section, Organization Chart).
SLD - 20
I
I
I
I
I
· 1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
There are approximately 23,000 records being managed by this SectIon. This SectIon Is primarily
charged with processing/ updating/ managing flies and data for water related Issues for the Land Department.
Approximately 52%, or 12,000, records are automated, with maintenance managed through the computer
system. The other 11,000 records are In the process of being computerized ( e. g., statements of claimants
for domestic use, Irrigation use, etc.) and are projected to be completed by the end of flscaIl993.
No significant backlog was evident during the study, and all work was being perfonned by the
assigned staff. Therefore, those positions now vacant are not considered essential to the operation of this
unit. Furthennore, when the remaining 48% of the records are computerized, a 50% reduction in the filled
positions should be realized.
We recommend the following:
• Eliminate one vacant Water Resource Specialist II positions, since there was no backlog
identified in the operation during the time of the study. Retain two vacant positions for the
pending " Stream Bed" legislation
• Eliminate three filled Water Resource Specialist II positions from the Administration sub­Section
at the end of fiscal 1993. when the remaining records management Is
automated/ computerized
• Relocate the Hydrology Technical sub- Sectlon ( two Eng. L. nd. Map and one Secretary) to a
new Resource Protection DMslon ( see Recommendation entitled " Reorganization of State
Land Department")
• Eliminate the Water Resource Manager I, pay grade 23, since only one Section will be left,
requiring one Supervisor.
SLD - 21
SLD- 22
• Time: 12 months.
• Effect the personnel position changes cited above
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
= $ 113,928
= $ 55,765
= $ 37,976
= 12° 7' 669'
• Cost reduction: three filled positions
one Water Resource Manager I
• Cost avoidance: one vacant FTE
• Total savings:
• expedite computerization of water records management, to be completed by the end of
fiscal year 1993
---------~~----~~~-
HYDROLOGY ORGANIZATION CHART - February 26, 1992 Exhibit 7
en
5
I\) w
wtr. Res. Program Mgr.
Dee Fuerst
Admin. Secretary I
D. smith
I I
Wtr. Res. Supvsr. - C. Stevanovic Wtr. Res. Supvsr. - O. Chatupron
Wtr. Res. Spec. III - B. Moody wtr. Res. Spec. III - D. Helms
Wtr. Res. Spec. 11* - J. Laney Wtr. Res. Spec. III - C. Constant
Wtr. Res. Spec. II - C. cantwell Engr. Lnd. Map Supv - J. Latham
Wtr. Res. Spec. II - J. Hicks Engr. Lnd. Map Tech - C. Hanye
Wtr. Res. Spec. II - G. pitts
wtr. Res. Spec. II - Vacant
Wtr. Res. Spec. II - Vacant
Wtr. Res. Spec. 11* - Vacant
Wtr. Res. Spec. 1** - S. Miller
Admin Secietary I - C. McBane
* Water Litigation
** Limited term position funded from water rights filing fees
APPYCATIQNS TO PlACE IMPROVEMENTS
When a lease has been signed between the State land Department ( SLD) and a lessee for the use
of State Trust land. specific conditions and applications are Incorporated Into that lease.
If a lessee desires to alter the land. their use of the land, or any structures ( or lack thereof) upon
the land, It Is necessary for the lessee to file an application ( see exhibit 8. Application to Place Improvement
Upon State land). There are actually three separate forms used relating to such Improvement ( see
exhibit 9, Report of Improvement Placed WIth Prior Approval). and exhibit 10. Report of Improvement Placed
WIthout Prior Approval. Both of the applications are processed In essentially the same manner, and the
report of completed work follows part of the same path.
Upon receipt of the application and the accompanying $ 50 filing fee, the cashier ( Administration
DMslon) enters that Information into her receipt computer. The application then Is sent out to the Records
Room ( Operations DMsion) staff who make a computer " rolodex" entry of the application, pull the hard copy
file folder, and send the application and file to the Operations DMslon Director, who forwards It to the Titles
and Contracts Section.
Titles and Contracts ( Operations DMslon) does a title search, ensures the land description Is
accurate. prepares a " process sheet" and determines the DMslon which manages that partiCUlar lease. The
file and application with process sheet Is then forwarded to that DMslon.
The DMslon staff assigned that lease then will evaluate the application. determine If the request is
appropriate to that particular land site and the existing lease purpose, and draft a recommendation either
to approve or deny the lessee's application. An Order documenting the staff recommendation Is prepared,
and the matter Is scheduled for the next Review Committee agenda.
The Review Committee, which meets every Thursday momlng, will almost atways approve the
recommendation submitted by DMslon staff. with consideration of cases hardly lasting 30 seconds. The
Order then will be signed by the Commissioner, the Deputy Commissioner, or the Director of the Operations
DMslon, who Chairs the Review Committee.
SLD - 24
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
After signature, the Order, application and file are returned to the Operations DMsion where It Is
processed for maUlng to the lessee and for tHing, which ( at least untU the end of the current fiscal year)
Involves sending It to the Administration DMsIon's Data Management Unit for Input to the Land Department's
computer system ( see exhibit 11, Applications to Place Improvements).
Numerous staff must be Involved In handling these applications, with essentially the only ones
making a decision relative to the application being those of the DMsion actually responsible for monitoring
the lease.
Additionally, when the " Report of Improvement Placed WIth Prior Approval" Is forwarded, much of
that same staff routing and time is involved. There also Is a significant Impact on the lessee, who must fill
out another set of forms, repeating much of that which was included on the original application.
If a lessee makes improvements or changes without prior approval, the " Report of Improvement
Placed Without Prior Approval" must be completed, filed with a $ 50 fee, and will follow basically the same
review path as described above.
ReconwnerriAtiollS
The following steps are recommended:
• Eliminate the requirement for a full application processing for matters such as these, by
receipting the fee, and then forwarding the application directly to the DMslon who monitors
that lease
• Approval or denial of the application should be signed by the DMslon Director upon
submission, with any necessary justification, by the lease manager
• Consolidate the " Report of Improvement Placed WIth Prior Approval" with the " Application To
Place Improvement", In such manner that the lessee need only to submit the fact that the
approved application has been acted upon by doing the Improvement, and reporting the costs
invoivea ( see Exhibit 12, Applications to Pi8ce improvement)
SLD - 25
• Direct the modification of the forms now In use
• Establish the processes outlined above
Implementation of this recommendation requires the Commissioner to:
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SLD - 26
3 months.
• The lessee will find filing for approval of and reporting completion of Improvements a less
onerous and more timely process, thereby Improving the relationship between lessor and
lessee.
• While study time has not permitted calculation of actual savings. It Is obvious there will be a
measurable monetary saving to the Department
• Staff time In Title and Contracts and the Review Committee will be freed for application to
other transactions more significantly In need of that time
• Staff handling time for these transactions wli be significantly reduced, and will be eliminated
by those segments no longer Involved In the actlvtty
• Delegate signature authority for these specific Orders to the DMsion Directors
• Time frame:
• Establish a process by which statistics on such transactions are appropriately reported.
The following benefits wli be realized by Implementing this recommendation:
• Change the action process for the - Report of Improvement Placed WIthout Prior Approval" to
follow the same direct forwarding for action to the managing DMslon
To avoid having your application rejected, please READ prior to submitting your application.
FILING INSTRUCTIONS:
A. Filing fee: $ 50.00 per application.
This application must be submitted in DUPUCAIE, ONE APPUCATION PERPROJECf. The Department will:
I
I
I
I
I
1.
B.
APPUCATION TO PLACE IMPROVEMENT UPON SfATE LAND
1. Retain one ( 1) copy for the State Land Department records.
2. Return one ( 1) copy to the applicant for their records.
Exhibit 8
Page 1 of 8
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
2.
3.
4.
5.
C. Complete all questions and SIGN the application on Page 3.
SIGNATURECS):
The application MUST BE SIGNED BY THE LESSEE( S) OF RECORD. If anyone other than the lessee( s) signs this
application, a notarized written authorization ( power of Attorney) must accompany the application. An additional
$ 50.00 filing fee is required when filing a Power of Attorney.
WRlTIEN APPROVAL REQUIRED:
WRITIEN APPROVAL OF THE STATE lAND COMMISSIONER IS REQUIRED BEFORE AN IMPROYfuV1E. l'IT CAN BE
PLACED. Pursuant to A. R. S. § 37- 321: Unless permission is granted by the Department, the applicant shall not be
entitled to reimbursement for improvements. Upon the expiration or cancellation of the lease or permit, such
unauthorized improvements shall be forfeited and become the property of the State of Arizona. If an improvement
has been started, or completed, DO NOT USE TI: llS FORM, you must submit the WReport of Improvement Placed
Without Prior Approvalw form. Improvements placed without prior aporoval are subject to removal or modification
at the lessee's expense. Disturbed land will also be subject to reclamation at the lessee's expense.
PROCESSING TIME:
PLAN AHEAD. Expect a minimum of ninety days processing time for this application to be reviewed by the State
Land Department. This application must be reviewed by some or all of the following agencies: Arizona Game and
Fish Department, Arizona State Museum, State Historic Preservation Office, Arizona Department of Agriculture, and
the Forestry Division. These agencies require sixty ( 60) days to review and respond to the Department.
OTHER REQUIREMENTS:
A. Construction of improvements may impact archaeological sites, threaten wildlife species, protected plants
and natural products with commercial value, such as fuel wood or cactus. The approved improvement
application may include specific conditions which will lessen the impact on these resources. All conditions
incorporated into an approved application MUST be adhered to.
B. If the proposed improvement entails the appropriation of public water, as defIned in A. R. S. § 4S · 141, an
Aoplication for Permit to Appropriate Public Water of the State of Arizona must be submitted to the Arizona
Department of Water Resources ( A. D. W. R.) PRIOR to authorization of this Aoplication to Place
Improvements. If the proposed improvement entails the drilling of a well, a Notice of Intent to Drill must
be submitted to A. D. W. R. and the Authorization to Drill must be received PRIOR to any associated
construction.
C. Authorization from the State Land Department for you to commence with any water related construction
will be contingent upon your compliance with the State Water Codes and conditions stipulated in your lease
perraining [ 0 the estaoiisnmem of water rightS on SLale Tn.. I: il i. anlb.
D. Improvements to be constructed on State Land must comply with local zoning and building codes. Applicant
must check with the local jurisdiction for compliance requirements.
SLO - 27
Exhibit 8 I
Page 2 at81
8. ASSISTANCE:
Contact one of the following sections for technical assistance, if required.
7. GRAZING LESSEECS) ONLY:
Complete the questionnaire on page 5 of the application and indicate the location of the proposed improvement on
the map on page 6 or on another suitable map.
6. COMMERCIAL LESSEECS)/ PERMITIEE( S) ONLY:
Complete the questionnaire on page 4 of the application and indicate the location of the proposed improvement on
the map on page 6.
SLD - 28
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
( 602) 542- 4625
( 602) 542 · 2650
( 602) 542- 4626
( 602) 542- 2650
( 602) 542- 2510
Arizona State Land Department
1616 West Adams
Phoenix, Arizona 85007
Agriculture
Commercial
Grazing
Homesite
Title and Contracts
6103- 07/ 91 Improvement
APPLICATION TO PLACE IMPROVE: MENT
I
I
I
I
I
REllJRM TO:
ARI2011A STATE lAND DEPARTMEliT
TITLE AJlI) CCIITRACTS SECTION
1616 \ l: ST ADAMS
PIKEIIX. ARIZOIIA 85007
SUBMIT FILIliG FEE:
$ 50
Exhibit 8
Page 3 eX S
DEPARnEJlTAL USE ONLY ROUDEX .,
ACCCXJNTI NG DATA MANAGEMENT DISPOSITION/ INITIAL DATE
Filing Fee: S50 EXAM: APPROVED
RE- ASSIGN: DENIED
APP TYPE: IMPROVE REJECTED
( 43) NO. OF APPS: ~ ITHDRAIJN
I
I
LEASE NOo _
COMPLETE ALL QUESTIONS, SIGN AND SUBMIT APPLICATION IN DUPLICATE AND ATIACH filing fee of $ 50 °
Pursutml to A. R. S. § 37- 321, lessee is not auilled to reimbUTSemm: for improvmJmU that have not bem authorized by prior written approval from rhe Department.
3. REQUEST TO PLACE IMPROVEl\ 1ENT:
Applicant hereby makes application to place improvement on the State lands described below in accordance with the
laws of the State of Arizona and the rules of the State Land Department.
4. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: ( location ofproposeti improvement)
Phone No.
SLD USE ONLY
CTY GRT PARCEL
----
Cl1JNTY
Permit No. _
Smte Trust lands described in Lease or
Application to Place Improvement on those
which expires on _
( Date)
TYPE OF APPliCATION:
ACRES
2.
n
u
Zip
.,
Slate
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
Conlac: t Person
City
Address
Name( s)
1. APPllCANT( S): I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
5. PURPOSE OF PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT: -~ ~--- I
I
I 6103- 07/ 91 Improvement SLO - 29
6103- 07/ 91 Improvement
COMMERCIAL LESSEE( S) fPERMITI'EE( S): You must also complete the questionnaire
on Page 4 and the map on Page 6.
GRAZING LESSEE( S): You must also complete the questionnaire on Page 5 and the map on
Page 6. [ A topographic map may be substituted for the map on Page 6.]
APPLICANT( S)/ LESSEE( S): COl\ 1PLETE AND SIGN PAGE 3.
( NOTE: This application must be signed by the State lessee( s) of record.)
Exhibit eI
Page4~ 8
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
...
SLD - 30
Estimated cost of proposed improvement is?
Completion date of proposed improvement is?
Starting date of proposed improvement is?
C.
DATES AND ESTIl\ 1ATED COST OF IMPROVEMENT:
A.
B.
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT:
8.
7.
9.
6.
10.
Exhibit 8
. - Page5of8 CERTIFICATION: Pw: suantto A. R. S. Tide 37 and the Rules oCtheAri7Dna Stare Land Department, A. A. c. Tide 12, OlaprerS. you mtL. __ ...,.._._
the following information pertinent to you and/ or the organization you represent and sign the a: niflQtion or your applic: ation WIll not be proe= crl.
1. Is this application made in the name of: ( check one)
___ Individual( s) Husband 8r Wife Corporation
__~ Other ( specify) _
I
I
I ___ Trust __--: Joint Venture ___ Municipality
___ Partnership
___ Political Subdivision
___ limited Partnership ___ Es. tate
I
2. INDlVIDUAL( s) OR HUSBAND 8< WIFE: Complete the following for each applicant:
NAME AGE MARITAL STATUS
I "
I
I
I
I
3. CDRPORATION: Complete the following:
( A) Do you have authority from the Arizona Corporation Comr..~ ion to do business in the State of Arizona? Yes No__.
( B) Is the corporation presendy in good standing with the Arizona Corporation Commission? Yes__ No__.
( C) In what state are you incorporated? --:-__:--""":"":"-__:------:--:--:- 7-'
( 0) Is the legal corporate name and Arizona business address the same as stated in this application? Yes__ No__.
If no. state the Legal Corporate Name: _
Address:. ~:__-~___:_:___:__~-----_:_' O'-----__:=':_:"-----__:_=___:_---_= 7"" 7'"--
( Street or Box Number) " ( City) ( State) ( Zip)
4. PARTNERSHIP OR JOINT VENTURE: Complete the following for each authorized partner or principal in the partnership or joint venture:
NAME BUSINESS ADDRESS AGE MARITAL STATUS
I
I
n
S. UMlTED PARTNERSHIP: Is this limited Partnership on file with the Arizona Secretary of State? L. J Yes
Complete the following for the authorized general partner( s) only:
GENERAL PARTNER( S) NAME BUSINESS ADDRESS
n
L. J No
I
AGE MARITAL STATUS
6. ESTATE: Complete the following and attach a CODV of the court or estate document( s):
Name of the court appointed administrator or personal representative: ----------
list the type and date of issuance of the court or Estate document:, ~--__:--------------_:::-_:_-_::_-
( Type of Document) ( Date issued)
7. TRUST: Complete the following pursuant to A. R. S. § 33- 404, for each beneficiary of the Trust:
NAME ADDRESS
I
I
I
I
OR Identify the Trust document by~ document number, and county where document is recorded: _
8. Are you acting as an Attorney in Fact for the applicant? Yes__ No__. If yes, you must submit a copy of your notarized Power of Attorney
and a 550.00 additional fee.
I I HEREBY ~ ll- Y. UNUtA PEriAi. I'I vri'u1.. f,. r, t{, T~ 1IUL uiFOIDriATICN AND : rr..~,;,"!"!:!~ m ~!" ITl2'! ED pF'P_ FTN'. - mr; ETHER wrI1I AIL
EXHIBITS AND ATTACHMENTS ARE TRUE. CDRRECI' AND CDMPLETE AND nIAT IIWE HAVE AUlliORiTt TO SIGN nns DOCUMENT.
I Applicant ( Corporation, Partnership, etc.) Date Applicant ( Individual) Dace
I Dy
6103- 07/ 91 Improvement
Title Applicant ( Individu< ll)
SLD - 31
Date
COMPLETE the following questions if you are applying to PLACE AN IMPROVEl\' IENT on your
COMMERCIAL LEASE OR PERMIT ONLY and indicate the location of the proposed improvement on
Page 6.
6103- 07/ 91 Improvement
What is the source and type of utilities, if required: _
If yes, describe: _
Exhibit 8 I
Page 6 of 8
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
· ,
r1
LJ No
rl
L.. J Yes
SLD - 32
COl\ 1l\ 1ERCIAL LESSEE( S)/ PER. MITrEE( S) ONLY
Is there any landscaping proposed in this project?
TIlustrate the location of the proposed improvement on the plat map on Page 6 or attach a site
development plan.
Does the proposed improvement comply with all local jurisdiction requirements?
r1 r1
LJ Yes LJ No
If yes, attach a copy of any permit( s) required.
If no, please explain: _
Do you consider this proposed improvement to be:
r1 r1
LJ Temporary LJ Permanent
Is the proposed improvement aiiowed and within ihe scope of your commercial lease?
r1 r1
LJ Yes LJ No
5.
4.
6.
1.
2.
3.
COMPLETE the following questions if you are applying to PlACE AJ.~ IM: PROVEMENT on your
GRAZING LEASE ONLY and indicate the location of the proposed improvement on Page 6.
I
I
I
GRAZING LESSEE( S) ONLY
Exhibit 8
Page 7 d 8
I
1. Will the placement of this range improvement and the associated activity require any ground disturbance?
r- t r- t
L.. J Yes L.. J No If yes, describe the type of disturbance and type of equipment til be used.
I
I 2.
ra ra
Is this improvement water related? L.. J Yes L.. J No
description of the water source, and the place of water use:
If yes, st: lte the ~ of water, the legal
a. Source: _
Section Township Range Landownership I
I
b.
c.
Source Location: 1/ 4, 1/ 4
Use Location( s): 1/ 4, 1/ 4
__ 1/ 4, __ 1/ 4 "---
b. Spacing of wires from ground level to top strand: _
From the categories listed below, indicate which best describes your project, and list the dimensions and type of
material used:
Spacing _
Spacing _
Spacing _
ra
L.. J No Ifyes, list dimensions and
rI ra
L.. J Yes L.... J No
MATERIAL
ra
L.. J No If yes, complete the following:
ra ra
L.. J Net L.. J Electric
Height _
Height _
Height _
ra
L.... J Yes
ra
L.. J Yes
ra
L.. J Smooth
DIMENSIONS
Material _
Material ----------- Material _
Braces:
Posts:
Stays:
Is this improvement a bam, shed or other building?
type 01 malenai usea:
Are you applying to ASCS for cost share funds on this improvement?
If yes, through which office? _
c.
e.
d.
Is this improvement a fence or a corral?
ra
a. Type of wire: L.. J Barbed
CATEGORY
Pipeline
Trough/ drinker
Storage tank
Earthen tank
Windmill
Well
Other
4.
6.
5.
3.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I 6103- 07/ 91 Improvement SLD - 33
L __ ~ __ ~ ___ L __ _:"" ___!.... __ ..!- __ ~ __... L __ .... L __ ~ __ ~ __ ~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Exhibit 8 I
Page 8 of 8 I
I
---.---,,
I
- t-
- - ' . 7---
I .
0, I - I -_._-- ,
- - ,
--~
! II
- ., ,
- _....!.... __ ... J
, I
I, , __ ... J - , ,
I
I
!, --- .. ~---
ARIZO\ 04 S7ATE" J.. JW:) OC? T.
r-- T-- T --,-- T-- T-- · r--'-- 7--- r -- r---:
I I I I I I I I I
I I 1 1 I I I I I :- - -+- -+ - -+--+--+ --- 1--- +- ._+ -- --- .._-- ~- -_..!
I I I
;- __ + I _ I I I I I I I I I '-~--, J : I: ; I: ' I
... - - + - - - I ---+- - - - f- - - +-- T---;-.. -- I I : ~
I : J •
!... - - - - -- t---~'--........--~'--+--- f-'--+---"';'-- 4 : I: : 1 : I : I I
" I I I • :~~ :~- ~-- T-- r- r-- --~-- r-:---
~--~ --~-- L- TI--_ L-- t- · -~-- 1-- 1--- ; : .. : I ; I : • I I
I I .' lIt - - - - --+---~----~--+--~--+-----+
: i I : J ; I i t-- t-- --- t,--- I--~,' -- T--:,:--- I--~,' ---
;---;-- I I I I I I I I -+--:
It- __ I I ~ _ _ - l- __ ~ __ ~ __....!- __ ~ __ ~ __. l- __ ~ __ "':'- __ ~ __ ~
I • , I 1 I I I I' J I
, I
I I
~- aD ....... ' Q'f'
too-. M " UT · · -=- r, · ........ n
,- ..... c. 1."..'._. v-' · -- I ..\.,. ..,. ..., ' UT
I
_';_ 1..
10""""" % 0 : lO 410 ! lO ~ ' 0 ~ Ie . rlCl~
'" '" 0 .. a; ~ y ~... tl. M
I , ! !, ,
I , I
1.
DEPARTMENTAL USE ONLY
Application to Place Improvement is APPROVED.
Additional conditions are attached and have been made a part of this permission.
rt rt
L. J Yes L. J No
I
I
Improvement must be completed by this date:. _ I
2. Applicant must submit a REPORT OF IMPROVEMENT WITH PRIOR APPROVAL fonn to the Arizona Sbte Land
Department within ten ( 10) days following the installation or completion of the improvement. I
STATE OF ARIZONA
ARIZONA STATE LAND COMMISSIONER I
( SEAL)
By:. -=---
Date I
6103- 07/ 91 Improvement SLD - 34
I
REPORT OF IMPROVEMENT PLACED WITH PRIOR APPROVAL
I
I
I
Exhibit 9
Page 1 of 5
To avoid having your report rejected, please READ prior to submitting your report fonn.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1.
2.
3.
FILING INSTRUCTIONS:
A. This report form must be submitted in triplicate, one set of reportS per project. The Department will:
1. Retain one ( 1) copy for the State Land Department records.
2. Submit one ( 1) copy to the County Assessor for their records.
3. Rerum one ( 1) copy to the lessee( s)/ permittee( s) for their records.
B. Complete all questions and sign the report on Page 3.
SIGNATURE( S):
The report form MUST BE SIGNED BY TrlE LESSEE( S)/ PE. Py, VIITrEE( S) OF RECORD. If anyone other than the
lessee( s)/ permittee( s) signs this report, a notarized written authorization ( power of Attorney) must accompany the
report. A $ 50.00 filing fee is required when filing a Power of Attorney.
LOC. A.. TION:
COMPLIANCE:
ASSISTANCE:
Specify the location of the improvement on the section map on Page 2.
Contact one of the following sections for technical assistance, if required.
( 602) 542- 4625
( 602) 542- 2650
( 602) 542- 4626
( 602) 542- 2650
( 602) 542- 2510
Agriculture
Commercial
Grazing
Homesite
Title and Contracts
Any Improvement placed without prior approval is subject to removal or modification at the lessee's expense.
Disturbed land will also be subject to reclamation at the lessee's expense:
Pursuant to A. R. S. § 37- 321, lessee is not entitled to reimbursement for improvements that have been authorized by prior
wn'tten approval from the Depanment.
5.
4. I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1616 West Adams
Phoenix, Arizona 85007
6107 · 07/ 91 Report w/ Prior Approval
SLD ~ 35
5. PURPOSE OF IMPROVEMENT:, _
3. REPORT OF Il\ 1PROVEMENT PLACED WITH PRIOR APPROVAL:
Lessee( s)! Permittee( s) hereby reports to the Arizona State Land Department completion of the improvement placed
on the State Land described below, which land is administered in accordance with the laws of the State of Arizona
and the rules or the State Land Department.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
of5
( Dart)
SLD USE ONLY
CTY GRT PARCEL
Permit No.---
Report of improvement placed with prior
which e:: r: pires on _
approval on Lands described in Lease or
TIPE OF REPORT:
ACRES
n
LJ
Zip
SLD- 36
Phone No.
Type or print in ink.
Sl. alc
LEGAL DESCRIPTIDII
DEPARTMENTAL USC DIlLY ROlCDEX • Page 2
ACC: OONTING DATA MANAGEMENT DISPOSITION/ INITIAL DATE
Fi ling Fee: None EXAM: APPROVED
RE- ASSIGN: DENIED
' rnin; yL. APP TYPE: REJECTED
NO. OF APPS: WITHORA\ JN
REPORT OF IMPROVEMENT PLACED WITH
PRIOR APPROVAL
RETURJI TO:
STATE ~( S) OR PERMITTEE( S):
ARIZOIIA STATE LAJID DEPARTMENT
TITLE AJID aJlTRACTS Sl: CTIDII
1616 ' l: ST ADAMS
PH< ElIX, ARIZCIIA 85007
4. LEGAL DESCRIPITON: ( locatilm a/ improvement)
L
6107- 07/ 91 Report w/ prior Approval
Address
Contact Person
Name( s)
City
COIYIPLETE ALL QUESTIONS, SIGN AND SUBMIT REPORT IN TRIPLICATE.
LEASE NO., _
7. DATE OF COMPLETION AND AcruAL COST OF IMPROVEMENT:
I
I,
I
6. DESCRIPTION OF IMPROVEMENT:
Exhlbtt 9
Page 3 of 5
LESSEE( S)/ PERMITfEE( S): COMPLETE AND SIGN PAGE 3.
( NOTE: This report fonn must be signed by the State lessee( s)/ permittee( s) of record.)
LOCATION OF IMPROVEMENT:
Indicate the location of the improvement on the plat map below or attach a topographic map.
Completion date of improvement is: _
Actual cost of improvement is: $, _
· ., t-_ ._- '. f'-!- V- · .. '-' I- I ......' Ut · T i .,..... ~_ ...+.- u" .... -.
0 00 20 : lO .., '" ~ ' Ia lID '!' eG "'*" -. 0-- • .. " U'T
01 e:-.. 0.<. c:- ~ ~. Cl( ~ --, f
__.. rue
. · eQIIl · ........ n I !
I I
---------~~---
--- r-- T-- T--,-- T-- T--- r-- T---;---- r -- r---:
I I I I I I 1 I I I
I I I I I I I 1 I I :... __ ~ __ ~ __ ~ __ -.!... __ ... L __ . 1.- __ .-!.- _ ._ ~ _ _ • • "_ _ _ I ,
, I I I I I I I I I
I
I I :---+-- i--...;..---------+-----.....--~-_ r- - ~ -- ~ ; I; : I I
I I I ~
:~~:~- --- r- r- r- "--~-- r --;-----~~ :~~:
. : I 1 1 : I: ..
;---~---"-- t- r- t-- I--:-- r-:--"--.'---~
----- -~--~ : : I: I I: : i
' i---', _ - --- T'---- l-- · I~-- --" TI ---\-- TI -- ---' l---: l
~ __ ~_ __-':"' __ - l
~-- t----- t-- t--+---"--:-- t-- :-- --. i-- 1
t---+- : j: ; I I -+--.,
I I I I I I I I · 1 I I
1 I I 1 I I 1 I I I I I I
I , I f I Iff 1 t • I t :----:--- 7--,-- 7-- 1'---;---.---;---" 7-- 7--,---,
, I 1
I I
! -- .~ __ ~..... L __ - L __....!- __ -!- __ -!
b.
L
~~ r L~
---~.;-.~. G.... c. _
AR! Z'OIIA S': lTt: lJH) Ci7f':.
I
I
I
Is.
I 9.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I 6107- 07/ 91 Report w/ Pnor Approval SLD - 37
Exhibit 9 I CER~~ TIO~: ~ t to A. R. S. Tide 37 and ~ R~ of tile Arizona sra~ Land ~ t, A. A. c. Tide ~ 2, ~ pre: r S,) IOU ~ Page 4 of
the following informaoon pernoent to you and/ or the o « ganaaoon you repre; cnt and SIgn the a: nificltion or your applicatlOD wm not be Jl!' OC5: ieu.
1. Is this application made in the name of: ( check one)
___ Individual( s) Husband &: Wife Corporation __---' Partnership ___ Limited Partnership ___ Estate I
2. INDIVIDUAL( s) OR HUSBAND &: WIFE: Complete the following for each applicant:
NAME AGE
___ Trust ___. Joint Venture ___ M, unicipality ___ Po, litical Subdivision __....; Other ( specify) _
MARITAL STATUS I
11
I i
:"
3. roRPORATION: Complete the following:
( A) Do you have authority from the Arizona Corporation Commission to do business in the State of Arizona? Yes No__.
( B) Is the corporation preseridy in good standing with the Arizona Corporation Commission? Yes__ NO__•
( C) In what state are you incorporated? ...,..,._....., -,-.,..-.....,.._'
( 0) Is the legal corporate name and Arizona business address the same as stated in this application? Yes__ NO__.
If no, state the Legal Corporate Name: _
Address: ---, -.,. -,.-,..-,. _
( Street or Box Number) ( City) ( State) ( Zip)
4. PARTNERSHIP OR JOINT VENTURE: Complete the following for each authorized partner or principal in the partnership or joint venrure:
NAME BUSINESS ADDRESS AGE MARITAL STATUS
I
I
I
n
5. LIMITED PARTNERSHIP: Is this Limited Partnership on file with the Arizona Secretary of State? Ll Yes
Complete the following for the authorized general partner( s) only:
GENERAL PARTNER( S) NAME BUSINESS ADDRESS
n
Ll No I
I
I
AGE MARITAL STATUS I
6. ESTAn: Complete the following and attach a CODV of the court or estate document( s):
Name of the court appointed administrator or personal representative: _
Ust the type and date of issuance of the court or Estate document: --:-----:---------------=---::-- o;:--
( Type of Document) ( Date issued)
7. TRUST: Complete the following pursuant to A. R. S. § 33- 404, for each beneficiary of the Trust:
NAME ADDRESS
I
OR Identify the Trust document by~ document number, and county where document is recorded: _ I
8. Are you acting as an Attorney in Fact for the applicmt7 Yes__ No__. If yes, you must submit a copy of your notarized Power of Anorney
and a SSO. OO additional fee.
I HEREBY CERTIFY, UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY, ' mAT TIlE INFORMATION AND STAT. EMEN1' S roNTAINED HEREIN, TOGlmIER wmI AU.
EXlnBITS AND ATTACHMENTS ARE TRUE, roRRECT AND roMPIEI'E AND ' mAT IIWE HAVE AunIORITY 1' 0 SIGN nus DOCUMENT.
Applic! nt ( Corporation, Partnership, etc.)
Dy Tide
Date Applicant ( Individual)
Applicant ( Individual)
DatE
Date
I
I
I
6107- 07/ 91 Report w/ Prior Approval SLD - 38 I
DEPARTMENTAL USE ONLY
( SEAL)
STATE OF ARIZONA
ARIZONA STATE LAND COMMISSIONER
Exhibit 9
Page 5 of 5
By: ---:__
Dace
SLD - 39
APPROVAL OF Il\ 1PROVEMENT DOES NOT CONSTITUTE ACCEPTANCE BY THE
DEPARTMENT OF THE VALUES STATED IN THE REPORT. IN THE EVENT OF THE SALE
OR DISPOSmON OF THE LANDS DESCRIBED, At~ APPRAISAL OF THE Il\ 1PROVEMENT
MUST BE MADE BY THE STATE LAND DEPARTMENT PURSUANT TO LAW.
The Report of Improvement is APPROVED.
Approval of this report is in accordance with the application to place improvement previously
approved by the Department.
6107- 07/ 91 Report wIPrior Approval
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
6106- 07/ 91 Report wlo Prior Approval
A. Filing fee: $ 50.00 per report.
3. Return one ( 1) copy to the lessee( s)/ permittee( s) for their records.
2. Submit one ( 1) copy to the County Assessor for their records. .
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
exhibit 10
Page 1 of 5
( 602) 542- 4625
( 602) 542- 2650
( 602) 542- 4626
( 602) 542 · 2650
( 602) 542- 2510 ·
Agriculture
Commercial
Grazing
Homesite
Title and Contracts
REPORT OF IMPROVEMENT WITHam PRIOR APPROVAL
Contact one of the following sections for technical assistance, if required.
Arizona State Land Department
1616 West Adams
Phoenix, Arizona 85007
SLD- 40
Improvements placed without prior approval are subject to removal or modification at the lessee's expense. Disturbed
land will also be subject to reclamation at the lessee's expense.
1. Retain one ( 1) copy for the State Land Department records.
Specify the . location of the improvement on the section map on Page 2.
Pursuant to A. R. S. § 37- 321, lessee is not entitled to reimbursement for improvements that have not been auJJwrized by prWr
written approvalfrom the Depa. rtment.
C. Complete all questions and sign the report on Page 3.
The report form MUST BE SIGNED BY TIlE LESSEE( S)/ PERMITTEE( S) OF RECORD. If anyone other than the
lessee( s)/ permirree( s) signs this report, a notarized written authorization ( power of Attorney) must accompany the
report. An additional $ 50.00 filing fee is required when filing a Power of Attorney.
B. This report form must be submitted in triplicate. one set of reports per project. The Department will:
To avoid having your report rejected, please READ prior to submitting to the Department.
3. LOCATION:
4. COMPLIANCE:
5. ASSISTANCE:
2. SIGNATURECS):
1. FILING INSTRUcrrONS:
COMPLETE ALL QUESTIONS, SIG:" I AND SUBMIT REPORT IN TRIPliCATE AND AITACH filing fee of $ 50 •
Pursuam to A. R. S. § 37 · 321, lessee is 1IOt enriUea: to reimhursemt: 1ll for improvements thaI have not been authonud by prior W7' Ilien approval from the Deparrm=
3. REPORT OF IMPROVE: MENT PLACED WITHOUT PRIOR APPROVAL:
Lessee( s)/ Pennittee( s) hereby reports to the Arizona State Land Department that an improvement has been
constructed or placed on State Land without prior approval and has not been reported on the State Land described
below, which land is administered in accordance with the laws of the State of Arizona and the rules of the State Land
Department.
REPORT OF IMPROVEMENT PLACED WITHOUT
PRIOR APPROVAL
exhibit 10
of5
SLD USE ONLY
CClJIlTY CTY GRT PARCEL
TYPE OF REPORT:
or Pennit No. _
approval on State Lands described in Lease
which expires on _
( Dare)
Report of improvement placed without prior
2.
ACRES
n
L. J
Zip
Phone No.
Stale
LEGAL DESCUPTION
DEPARTlEJITAl usc: CNlY ROlOOEX , Page 2
ACCWNTING DATA MANAGEMENT DISPOSITION/ INITIAL DATE
Filing Fee: S50 EXAM: APPROVED
RE- ASSIGN: DENIED
Il"' V"\ prc~
API' TYPE: ' Wt REJECTED
( 43) NO. OF API'S: IoIITHDRAIoIN
REllJRII TO:
Typt: or print in inJ:.
S50
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: ( location o/ improvement)
STATE LESSEE( S) OR PERl\ 1l'I" I'EE( S):
SUBMIT FIlIMG FEE:
ARIZOIA STATE LAND DEPARTlEJIT
TITLE AND COlTRACTS SECTICM
1616 lolEST ADAMS
Ptta: JlIX. ARlzetIA 85007
4.
1.
Conlacl Person
City
Address
:" 1ame( s)
LEASE NO. _
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
5. PURPOSE OF IMPROVEMENT: _ I
I
I 6106 · 07/ 91 Report w/ o Prior Approval SLD - 41
8. LESSEE( S)/ PERMITfEE( S): COl\ 1PLETE AND SIGN PAGE 3.
( NOTE: This application must be signed by the State lessee( s)/ pennittee( s) of record.)
9. LOCATION OF IMPROVEMENT:
Indicate the location of the improvement on the plat map below or attach a topographic map.
b. Actual cost of improvement is: $ _
I
! t I I 1 I I , I I • I I --- -- ----- --- ------------ -------- - --- I I, I I j I. I I
I
I I I
L.. __ -:- __ ~ ___:_ __~ __-:.... __ ~ __ ~ __.-:-. -- -!..... -_~ __ ....!... __ ~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
exhibit 10
Page 3 of 5
, I
r---:
I
I
SLD - 42
--- r-- j-- j -- 7--- 1-- j-- -' 1---;-- --;---- 1--
I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I
----, -
~- ----~--~-_....!.-_-~ -_.!-. __ "':-- -~--
I I I I I I I I I
I I
,- - - - 7- - -' l-----~-~-..., I ~_-~-"!"""--+-- ~
I I ; t : I I I I ;, '- - -_.'- -- --+- - - I ---:- -- ---;- --- I---;- .. -- --....!- - - -
I I • 1
I : I •
I I I 1 , I t - - - -;- - -- I--~:--- I---;:--+--~;--- 1----+ ----;-" ---
I ; I I
~--+--- f--- t--- l-- t--- --~--- I--:, -- __..:. __.. 2
-~-_....:
; I ; t : I: '; I I . I I
;!- ,' _- ---;--- 1--- I~-- · ---;--- 1"--;- I -- -_,~ __ .. J I
I : I I
I, I I I • I I - - .. - - +----.;--~---...;.--+--~-~--~--+ - - 7---:
i I: I I; I
I ! I I I
~-- t--~-- t- r- t ------ t- r- t- ----'---"
~- -~ --~-~'--.....-~'--+---' ------'--+---+-- ~
DESCRIPTION OF IMPROVEMENT:
_. c.:_': r---, LT='- Nr:'' P: rj.......'....._---
AR\ ZO'I04 ~ n:: ~ r£ P7.
a. Completion date of improvement is:
7. DATE OF COMPLETION AND AcruAL COST OF IMPROVEMENT:
6.
6106- 07/ 91 Report wlo Prior Approval.
Exhibit 10
CERTIFICATION: Pursuant to A. R. S. lade 37 and the Rules of the Arizona Sl3r. e Land Department. A.. A. c. lade 12, Clapr. er 5, ' I Page 4 of 5 ~
the following information pertinent to you and/ or the organization you ~ tand sign the ~ tionor your applicaOon W111 noc: be proa: ssed.
2. INDIVIDUAL( s) OR HUSBAND 8< WIf'E: Compler. e the following for each applicant:
NAME
____ Political Subdivision ___ O. ther ( specify) _
___ Estate
MARITAL STATUS
____ Li. mited Parme~ hip
AGE
___ Corporation ___ Parm= hip
____ Trust ____, Joint Venture ____ M. unicipality
1. Is this application made in the name of: ( check one)
___ I, ndividual( s) Husband & Wife
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
3. CORPORATION: Complete the following:
( A) Do you have authority from the Arizona Corporation Commission to do business in the State of Arizona? Yes No__.
( B) Is the corporation presently in good standing with the Arizona Corporation Commission? Yes__ No__.
( C) In what state are you incorporated? _
( 0) Is the legal corporate name and Arizona business address the same as stated in this application? Yes__ No__.
If no, state the Legal Corporate Name: _
I
I
Address: ~--~~:___:__:__----------_:_:::~-----~=___:_---""":'::":_:_--
( Street or Box Number) ( City) ( State) ( Zip)
4. PAR'l'NERSHlP OR JOINT VENTlJllE; Complete the following for each authorized parmer or principal in the parme~ hip or joint venture:
NAME BUSINESS ADDRESS AGE MARITAL STATUS
I
I
i1
S. LIMITED PARTNERSHIP: Is this Limited Parm= hip on file with the Arizona Secretary of State? LJ Yes
Complete the following for the authorized general oarmer( s) only:
GE. 1I. fERAL PARTNER( S) NAME BUSINESS ADDRESS
n
LJ No
AGE MARITAL STA11JS
6. ESTATE: Complete the following and arrach a coov of the court or estate Jocument( s):
Name of the court appointed administrator or personal representative: _
List the type and date of issuance of the court or Estate documenr: ---:-__
( Type of Document) ( Date issued)
7. TRUST: Complete the following pu~ uant to A. R. 5. § 33- 404, for each beneficiarY of the Trust:
NAME ADDRESS
I
I
I
I
I
OR Identify the Trust document by~ document number, and counry where document is recorded: _
8. Are you acting as an Anomey in Fact for the applicant? Yes NO . If yes, you must submit a copy of your notarized Power of Anomey
and a 550.00 additional fee.
I I HEREBY CERTIFY, UNDER PENALTI OF PERJURY, 1HAT TIlE INFORMATION AND STA1' EMEN'Ts CDNTAlNED HEREIN, TOGETHER WITH ALL
EXHIBITS AND ATI. ACHMEN1' S ARE TRUF., CORRF. cT AND CDMPIJIT'E AND TIiAT lIWt. liJWl:. J\ uHiOiUiY 10 5lG.. TIITS DCC'..! M: E!' IT_
I Applicant ( Corporation, Parme~ hip, etc.) Date Applicant ( lmiividual) Date
I By
6106- 07/ 91 Report w/ o Prior Approval
Title Applicant ( lndivll.. iual)
SLD- 43
Date
If this improvement is for a water improvement, you must also notify the Arizona Department of
Water Resources.
The Report of Improvement Placed on Stlte Land without Prior Approval, and for which
permission was not previously approved by the Department, will not be allowed to remain on the
land. The improvement must be removed immediately and the land restored to it's original
condition.
The Report of Improvement Placed On Stlte Land Without Prior Approval, and for which
permission was not previously approved by the Department, has been placed on record with the
Stlte Land Department. Pursuanl to A. R. s. § 37- 321, lessee is not entfrIed to reimbursement for improvements that
have not been azUlwrized by prior written approval from the Department.
DEPARTMENTAL USE ONLY
I exhibit 10 )
Page 5 of 5 I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
STATE OF ARlZONA
ARIZONA STATE U-.. T\ JD COMMISSIONER
SLD - 44
Date:------------
11
LJ
11
LJ
6106- 07/ 91 Report w/ 0 Prior Approval
I PRESENT PROCESS - APPLICATIONS TO PLACE IMPROVEMENTS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
LESSEE
Al'I'LICATION
FILED
ADMINISTIIATIVE
DIVISION
CASHIER
FEE
CLLECTED,
RECEII'T
I
OI'EIlATIONS
DIVISION
RECOI'tDS CLERK
" ROLODEX"
FILE
ENTRY;
I'ULL FILE
TITLE EXAMINER,
TITLE SEARCH,
I'ROCESS SHEET
I
DIVISION I CAS Al'I'ROI'RIATE)
Al'I'LICATION
EVALUATED
REVIEW
ee- ITTEE
ExhIbIt 11
ee- ISSIONER
OI'tDERS
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
AVERAGE TINE
ELAI'SED.
38 DAYS
DATA
ENTRY
LOG AND
MAIL
< E7"~" I
GRANT
": mIi V
SLD - 46
ORDER
SIONED
AH013
03/ 30/ 92
PROPOSED PROCESS - APPLICATIONS TO PLACE IYPROVEYENT
exhibit 12
I ADIUNISTItATIVE I DIVISION
LESSEE DIVISION LEASE IWIAGER
CASHIER
APPLICATION
SUIIIITTED
~ r
~
FEE
RECEIPTED
I
Al'PLICATION
EVALUATED
ELAPSED TIME.
2 - 3 DAYS
APPROVE
Y OR N
ORDER
PREPARED AMD
SIGNED
IIAILlNO
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ORDER
RECEIVED
SlD - 46
,
ENFTILREY )
COMPLETED
)
AH01~
03/ 30/ 92
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
DATA PROCESSING
The Data Management Unit ofthe Business Systems Section, Administration and Resource Analysis
DMslon, presently must enter all data Into the main frame computer system. Accounting data Is now
entered through an out- dated coding sheet and key punch process, due to the type of program and
equipment In place.
Data Management staff Is composed of a Management Information Specialist, an Information
Processing Specialist III, three Information Processing Specialists II ( one of whom Is halt- time) and an
Information Processing Specialist I ( currently vacant). These work under the general supervision of the
Section Manager, an EDP Systems Project Manager.
Data is submitted In hand written or typed form to this Unit from the various Sections of the
Department requiring Input. Both original and updating data as well as corrections to already entered data
are thus submitted. This work then Is assigned to the Data Management Unit Manager, for assignment to
the specific IPS staff.
The Business Systems Section Is In the final stages of a five- year conversion plan, projected ( with
fNery expectation of meeting the time line) to complete the final conversion step by June 30, 1992. That
wUl bring the accounts and bUling processes of the Department to a direct data entry mode within those
units, thereby eliminating this Data Management Unit.
There Is currently a lack of word processing capability throughout the Department, and no
expressed plans to alter that situation In the near future, nor as a part of the data processing system
presently being implemented. If computer prepared documents are to be transferred from one work location
to another, It Is accomplished by loading that data onto a computer disk, and physically transmitting It to
the next station, or by passing on hard O. e., printed or handwritten) copies which then need to be re- typed.
The present process, since It Is running parallel to the direct entry test base and entails coding
sheet/ key punch operaiions, creai85 a very cUmDersorn8, tRow j. lr~ iut t1tltry. Furth"" ttl" Pi66ailt
system results In not having real time information available to the program managers. Although much of
SLD - 47
this system wUl be changed over to the direct entry process effective July 1, 1993, there stili Is a training and
acceptance curve to be completed.
We are advised that, at conclusion of the data system conversion, five staff members now In Data
Management wUl be reassigned, and that Unit wUl be abolished. These staff members are:
• Management Information Specialist ( present Unit Manager) and an Information Processing
Specialist OPS) II who wUl be assigned to digitizing land descriptions data tor the ALAIS
program, on behalf of SLD ( essentially an Operations DMslon function, although they will be
supervised within the Business Systems Section)
• An IPS III and an IPS I ( presently vacant) being assigned to the Operations DMslon,
Administrative Procedures and Information Section, Public Counter ( records)
• An IPS II being transferred to the Accounting Section In the Administration DMslon
• An IPS 1\ ( half- time position) moved to the Operations DMsion, Appraisal Section.
The lack of any networked word processing system, and also of any extensive number of stand
alone computer stations, results in slowing down all segments of the Department's operations, and creating
the necessity for:
• Manual transmittal of file and document information
• Handwriting of voluminous reports by the various professional staff, which subsequently are
then typed by the limited clerical staff
• Added time tor proofing the type written documents, editing and having corrections made
thereon which then requires a final proofing before signature and passing on through the
system.
The lack of a computer network for general word processing also severely limits the abUIty of the
Department to establish much - boYer plate- language, the use of which would speed up many of the areas
in which documentation is required and reports must be written.
SLD - 48
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
We recommend the following actions be taken:
• Strongly pursue complete development and Implementation of the computer information
system now being installed
• Explore opportunities to Incorporate total development of a local area network ( LAN) system,
to provide word processing, spreadsheet and other such functions from a server- based,
shareable system, with costs and benefits to be identified
• Abolish the IPS III, pay grade 13, and IPS I, pay grade 9, positions now scheduled for transfer
from Data Management, at a cost reduction of $ 33,635
• Abolish the vacant IPS I position scheduled for transfer to the Public Counter ( where no
backlog exists), at cost reduction of $ 16,258
• Relocate the two staff who will be doing the digitizing for the Department to the G. I. S.
( A. LR. I. S.) Unit, located as shown In exhibit 5, State Land Department, Proposed
Organizational Chart.
Benefits to be obtained from this recommendation Include:
• Cost avoidance of $ 16,258 ( pay grade 9, with ERE) by not filling the presently vacant IPS I
position
• Cost reduction of $ 33,635 by elimination of two IPS positions
• Improved information input, thereby diminishing staff time presently required to accomplish
that task ( no monetary computations have been attempted in this regard)
• D9Cf9ase In th9 size of the AcIm! nl~~ tlon DMslon, Buslnes.~ Systems Section to 10. thereby
improving the present span of control
SLD - 49
• Increased accuracy and productivity of major groups of staff, by provision of a LAN- based
word processing system. plus making avaHable other tools such as spread sheets. data bases
and flow chart programs
• Improved communications among all Department staff, upon Implementation of the
recommended LAN.
Implementation of these recommendations will be achieved by:
• Transferring the noted positions. as cited
• Eliminating the vacant IPS positions
• Securing and Implementing the LAN system with requisite work prodUcts throughout the
Department
• Time: 3 months.
SLD - 50
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
MVlll- YEAR RENTAL AGBfFMfNT'$
The State Land Department ( SLO) through Its Forestry Fiscal 8ectIon within the Administration
Division Implements approximately 135 cooperative fire fighting agreements each year with local fire
departments throughout the state. These agreements authorize those departments to fight fires, upon being
property dispatched by SLO, on state land or private land. These remain In force untl properly canceled
by either agency.
Additionally, there are numerous - rental agreemenr contracts consummated with local suppliers
of food, shelter, transportation, equipment and miscellaneous supplies. These Items will be supplied under
those contracts ~ In the event a fire occurs within that area during the year. However, these contracts
must all be executed annually, prior to the start of the fire season, In order to ensure there Is no break In
the supply line during times of emergency. These agreements must be re- wrltten annually, Involving the time
of SLO staff and that of any Involved fire departments and vendors.
In several cases the process of compiling these agreements becomes delayed, either through
Inattention, or attorneys faDing to review the proposed agreements on time. Such time problems can create
a situation In which adequate fire fighting coverage, equipment and supplies are not avaDabie at the start
of fire season.
Different District Office staff throughout the state ara Involved In developing these agreements, plus
those staff required to write, edit, and proof them. These activities Include four hours writing time by the
District OffIce staff, plus six to eight hours meeting with the vendors, plus travel time. Staff time also Is
reqUired to Input them Into the SLO computer system, authorize them, and In monitoring them. OffIce staff
spend approximately two hours typing and completing the contracts, and readying them for final signatures.
It Is our understanding that hundreds of hours may annually be expended In obtaining these
service/ rental contracts from vendors In all the communities In order for the Department to be ready for the
fire season, even though a number of those contracts may never be activated, since those areas might not
be involved with any fires. This represants a significant amount of lima axpanu6U for minillli: li wntfa~ t U~.
however, under the present structure, a very necessary retum on Invested time.
SLO - 51
The following Is recommended:
• Explore the potentlal for establishing a single vendor entity ( such as a Chamber of Commerce
or other existing community service organizations) for these services to be provided under
one contract, then sub- contracted at the prime vendor's discretion
• Develop muttl- year Q. e., three year) agreements with all these vendor organizations
• Include In these contracts some terms for rate adjustments or review on an annual basis, to
compensate for Inflation rates. and wording to protect the state If funds are not authorized for
the services
• Establish these agreements on a staggered sequence of renewal dates, with approximately
one- third per year thus needing renewal.
Benefits to be derived from this recommendation Include:
• Decreased staff time Involved In preparing and finalizing Inter- govemmental agreements
between SLD and these iocal supply providing vendors ( which could not be calculated. but
Is known to be substantial)
• Lessened occasions when cooperative agreements are not In place at the start of the annual
fire season
• Improved planning capability. with the assurance there will be on- golng fire fighting supplies
and services avaUabie In effected areas of the state
Implementation of this recommendation will require:
SLD - 52
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
• Meeting with the Involved local communities and vendors, . together with the local fire
departments, to explain the reasoning for this proposal, answering their questions and
securing their commitment to the plan
• Identifying those organizations who wUl serve as prime contractor In each community
• Drafting and signing the required multi- year contracts
• Time: 12 months.
SLD - 53
EQRESTBY PMSION
The Forestry Division Is responsible for 23 programs. They provide technical assistance to the
State Land Department ( SLD) and private land owners, communities, and rural fire departments; and fight
wBdflres.
The Forestry Division has two sections. The Forestry Management Section, which has two filled
Natural Resource Manager II ( N/ R Mgr II) positions, and one vacant EDP Programmer Analyst I position;
and the Fire Management Section which has six positions plus 14 positions In the District OffIces ( see
Exhibit 13, Forestry Division, Current Organization).
The Forestry Management Section Is responsible for forest health. They keep track of trees on
private and state land, and respond to requests from land owners on serious problems like insects and
diseases. Forestry Management Identifies problems and then recommends solutions and precautionary
steps to avoid problems in the future. There are about 200 to 300 such requests per year on which the
Forestry Management works. Personnel are, however, cross- trained to work In the Fire Management
Section. There is one vacant EDP Pr~ rammer Analyst I position. This position's responsibility was to do
mapping for hazard analysis, which was a specialized project and is already complete.
The Fire Management Section and Its District offices are for fire protection on state and private land.
There were approximately 3,000 to 4,000 fires last year. 75% were rural fires which were taken care of by
the rural fire fighters. The Forestry Division has a joint cooperative agreement with about 150 rural fire
departments who take care of the fires and then charge fees back to the State Land Department. The other
25% of fires, mostly big fires, are supervised by the Fire Management personnel. They train crews ( e. g.,
state prisons crews) and them to fight fires.
The Fire Management Section works with the Bureau of Land Management ( BLM), National Forest
Service ( NFS), Bureau of Indian Affairs ( BIA), National Park Service ( NPS) and local fire departments. They
establish rental agreements with agencies and vendors for equipment, food, motels and other necessities
required to supply the fire fighters In the field.
SLD- 54
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
This Section also operates statewide fire dispatching services from their Phoenix office, with BLM
also operating a parallel dispatch system, but concentrating on those fires occurring on BLM land. These
agencies' dispatch offices ( SLO and BLM) are located approximately three mBes apart, and are responsible
for the statewide dispatching of those fire fighting craws paid by either department. SLO calls dispatchers
on nights, weekends and holidays to respond to the dispatch office, contacting them by pager or telephone,
as needed. This necessitates the dispatcher going to the office, with response time of anywhere from 45
minutes to an hour and a half. open the office. assemble the required Information relating to the emergency.
and then commence dispatching fire fighting crews and equipment.
The vacant EDP Programmer Analyst I position In the Forestry Management Section Is no longer
needed. since the mapping work for the hazard analysis has been completed.
It was thought the dispatching services provided by the BLM and SLO would be better able to
function without overlap or confusion If their offices were combined. Negotiations between BLM and SLO
were attempted, Intending to relocate the BLM staff and operations from their currently rented facUlties Into
the state owned SLO facUlties at 29th Avenue and Pinnacle Peak Road. Rental costs to BLM would have
been reduced, SLO would get needed personnel back- Up, and 24 hour manning of the dispatch offices
during fire season would be more easily and efficiently achieved. However, BLM has advised they are not
presently Interested in such an arrangement.
• Eliminate the vacant EDP Programmer Analyst I position
• Establish an inter- agency agreement with the BLM for combining dispatching services of the
two agencies
• $ 27,000 in cost aVoidance
SLO- 55
• Abolish the designated vacant positions
• Time: 1 month.
SLD- 56
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
rOXESTRY Drv: SION
Exhibit 13
C Jones
B Lauber
...... Sloan
R Dominquez
T wartield
S Scranton
A Hendricks
J Kraske
J" Yout:
X Boness
K Ne.... bauer
R Horton
B Banke
SHunt
26
o Behrens
P Cirincione
o Bro'W'T1
T Sher':' lan
J Gothard
E S~ an! ield
R Celaya
C Pearlberq
Vacant
H Hart
I Guthrie ,.
R Romat:, ke
J CameronHild
SLO - 57
EINkTOP
N/ R Hqr III
N/ R Hqr I
PHOENIX
N/ R Mg- r III
FLOGS'!'?:::" F
Land Mg= I
N/ R Hg::- II
N/ R Mgr !
N/ R Mqr I
NRH I
Secretary
N/ R Tec:." l en:)
IUCSON
N/ R Mgr III
N/ R Hgr I
CURRENT FORESTRY DIVISION
ORGANlZAllON CHART
MARCH 1992
pR;; SCOTI
N/ R Hq= III
; N/ R Teen.
Land Mgr I
N/ R Hqr I
N/ R Mqr I
Equip Mee~ Supv
Equip Mee~ II
AdJ: l. n See I ( L)
n/ R Mqr II
N/ R Hgr II
EOP Prg . An I
Land Mqr II
AdJ:: I. n See II
H/ R Mqr III
Admn Ass't III
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
URBAN PlANNING - STAGES OONSOUDAllON
The Urban Planning DMslon presently has a three- stage process by which applications must be
worked for reclassifying and developing State Trust Lands to commercial use or development for sale.
These Include the
• Urban Lands Classification Process,
• Urban Lands General Planning Process, and the
• Urban Lands Development Planning Process.
Each of these processes Involve input of information from various Department and outside sources,
evaluation of that information, Issuance of Commissioner's Orders, Public Notices and Public Hearings ( see
exhibit 14, Classification Planning Flow Chart, and exhibit 15, General Planning Process Flow Chart).
The Urban Planning DMsion has approximately 58 sites assigned. at some stage In this process,
with a Director and seven Planners Involved, plus two Secretaries and a person responsible for printing
documents. Developing the required information, and preparing the required plans for development is a
lengthy, Involved process, and allows each Project Manager to have a number of projects In progress at
any given time.
Considerable staff time Is now Invested In repetitive processes, especially those Involved with
preparation for and reporting on the Public Hearings. By going through a preliminary evaluation, and
forwarding It to a formalized decision point, and then following that with a preliminary planning process, a
significant amount of time Is invested with minimal productivity.
The following is recommended:
SLD- 58
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
• Condense the Urban Lands Classification process and the Urban Lands General Plan Planning
process Into a single activity ( see exhibit 16, Proposed Process, Combined Stages)
• Eliminate one Planner III position.
The benefits to be achieved from this Recommendation Include:
• Reduction of approximately 15% of the Urban Planning DMslon's time Investment In moving
from an original proposal to classify a land portion as · urban land · , to the point where actual.
detailed commercial/ residential planning Is ready to be started.
• Completion of assigned projects In a speedier manner, due to the additional time made
available ( seven Planners X 1675 productive hours per year X 15% = 1,758.75 additional
hours, or one F. T. E.
• Cost savings of one Planner III position, $ 46,565.
IrnpIern@ ltaIiun:
Implementation of this Recommendation will Involve:
• Amending AR. S. 37- 331.01 and 333 ( see exhibit 17)
• Submission of revised Administrative Rules and Regulations which now mandate these
separate processes
• Rewrite the DMslon procedures setting forth the process by which these planning stages are
completed
• Time: 18 months.
SLD - 59
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ExhIbIt 14
Page 1 of 2
0lltER DMSIDNS
I AOOITICIlAl I DATA
COllECTED
I _ SllIATICIl ~ VSIS I
lI!' 5aJICE DMSICIl
YES
-~ I. t 1 ASSEHBLED 14-~--+--+---+---:;""-+---- JI------ 4-- __--- J
COlLECTED r I
PL8LIe I t£ ARIN6
I'REPARATICH
STATE LAND DEPARTWENT
CURRENT PROCESS - CLASSIFICATION PLANNING ( 1ST PHASE PLANNING)
PER ARS 37- 332
P\. 8I. IC I - PLNMNG DIVISICIl I ClPI! RATIlIIS DMSICIl
IAPP== I L~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
STATE LAND DEPARTNENT ExhIbIt 14
CURRENT PROCESS - CLASSIFICATION PLANNING Page 2 of 2
PER ARS 37- 332
PUeLIC I _ Pl_ ING DIVISION I CI'! IlATIONS DIYISION I AIlIlINISlllATION IoIIAL'lSIS I cmt! R DIVISIONS I ~ lUtlISSIONER
IlESCUICf DMSION 9 8
~
( 30 OA~ S)
no ~
PUeL IC I£ ARING
I
•
~ r ~
'--'~
I I I 1
3J+ . I I I ~ 0 ' l'ES
DENIAl I
~ LAND NOW
CLASSIFIED AS
AN URBAN PLAN
SITE
I I i I
SLO - 61 \' 70408- 3
PER A. R. S. 37- 333
STATE LAND DEPARTWENT
URBAN PLANNING DIVISION
GENERAL PLANNING PROCESS
( 2 nd PWSE PLAll/ I~)
EXHIBIT 15 I
I
mPllEPAIlED CJl
SENT
~~
~!':~~_-__:_--_~-_' Y. l.- IloI£ R_' I- 5ENlr--_:_----+-----_:__-----+-----_:__---__: l
[~~ <$>
l...--- I---.
PIJlLIC
t£ ARING
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
ADDITI() lI, L
DATA
6ATl£ AEll
•
OTIER DIVIS1() lS
REQUEST
P.~
PLAN
PRlJECT
IWWlER
ASSIONED TO
REVIEW
APPLlCATI() j
•
• liEHERALPLAN
DIW'T
ClJf'LETED
_ PLNlS DMSI() j
6~ lIJi
V lEI
YES L:~
,...--_---'-_----+------ olf---:--- f-----'
lIlBAH ClASSIFIED LAIIl
•
<$>
IliEHERAL PLAN I ~
I
I
I
I
SLD - 62
V7e41- j I
URBAN PLANNING DIVISION
COMBINED STAGES - ARS 37- 332.333 - AMENDED
PROPOSED PROCESS
MLIC
Exhibit 16
_ COIlITTEE COIlIS5Il: lIER
~. E. P.
ADIUIiIST .11IE5QJlCE 0TIlI9I DmSI(); S
NW. YSIS DIVISI();
< INCL. GIS)
1_ Pl_ III6 DIVISIC); I
I
I
I
I •
I
I
PAOJ. PQl.
ASSIGNED ­START
NW. YSIS
• IlEDJIREO
DATA
SlJIlItITTED
t
IlEDJIREO
DATA
SlJIlItITTED
I t
REt: l£ ST &
DATA
NW. VZEO
I
I
lESSEE~ W ADJACENT
PIla'ERTY
CITIES & TCWIS
r----:---+---~---+--:.....--_+__-:..--_-~-'-'- r;
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
REVIEW ­EITl1ER
COIlIITEE
t
~ NlTICErSJrA: FRE
REClASSIF.
COIlEllTS &
INPUT
NW. YZEO
GEIERAL PlAN
• REVIEW
P. E. P. CJl
REV. COIl.
ICOIl1~ · J_--:-; ---.:.. I- ---.-:.-~~ '- r I I I I I ~
I
SLD- 63
.~ PlAN ADOPTED
•
WlJ7llll
ARTICLE 5.1. . URBA.. l\ LAJ\' DS DEYELOPME~ T
Cron References '
Lease of SLate lands, reservation of rights to
state, exception, see § 37- 2Si.
State lands, proceduore for protestinI; auctions,
fiJinI; written protest, see § 3i- 301.
§ 3i- 331.
, .
For repeal under Sunset Law, see'italic note preceding § Si- 201
Definitions
exhibit 17 I
Page 1 of 5
I
I
In t. his article, unless the cont. eA- t otherwise requires:
1. " Existing lessee" means the lessee entitled to the use of state lands at the t. ime
such lands are considered for classification and are classified as urban lands suitable for
urban planning or an existing lessee who continues to lease urban lands follo""' ng
classification as urban lands suitable for urban planning, or a person wno leases urban
lands following classification as urban lands suitable for urban planning.
2. " Local planning authorities" means any city, town or county in which urban lands
suitable for urban planning are located. When urban lands that are located in an
unincorporated area · 9f a. county are desit; nated as urban lands suitable for urban
planning, a city or toW11 whose cO.'" P0rate boundaries are three miles or less from these
lands shall be considered to be a local planning authority, together with the governing
body of the county in whose jurisdiction the lands are located.
3. " P1::. nning cont.-- acUlr" means the person or persons who com:- aet with the depart­ment
to formulate a development or secondary plan for ~ rban lands suitable for u'rban
planning.
Amended by Laws 1989, Ch. 59, § 1; Laws 1990, Ch. 25, § 5.
§ 37- 331.01. Designation of state lands as urban lands upon reo
quest
A. The governing body of a city, town or county may request that the
commissioner designate as urban lands state lands that are located
within:
1.' One mile of the corporate boundaries of an incorporated city or
town having a population of less than two hundred fiity thousand people.
2. Three miles of the corporate boundaries of an incorporated city or
town having a population of more than two hundred fifty thousand
people.
B. The commissioner shall provide notice of a request mace pursuant
to subsection A of this section to all local governing bodies within three
miles of the land in question.
C. The commissioner shan designate as urban lands those st;. te lands
requested pursuant to subsection A of this section unless the commis­sioner
determines that the d, esignation is an inappropriate categorization
of the hmds. When the commissioner makes a designation, he shall
provide notice of the designation of the lands as urban lands to all local
governing bodies within three miles of the lands so designated. If the
commissioner determines that the designation would be inappropriate, he
shall state in writing his reasons, and shall provide a copy of this
statement to the requesting local go · .. erning body. The local governing
body may appeal this decision to the board of appeals. as provided in
§ 3i- 214.1
Added b)' Laws 1981, 1st 5. S., Ch. 1, § 22.
1 So in oril;' in: ll. Probabl)' should read " 3i- 215".
SLD- 64
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
§ 37- 332. Urban lands; notice; hearing; requirements; classifica­tion
A. The commissioner may, on his own initiative, designate c- ertain
urban lands as being under consideration for classification as urban
lands suitable for urban planning pursuant to this section. The commis­sioner
may designate urban lands as being unde: considerati~ n ~ or
classification as urban lands suitable for urban planning upon appltcatlOn
by the governing body having jurisdiction for the area in which the
urban lands are locnted.
B. After designatir. g urban lands pursuant to ~ ubsection. -!'-' the
commissioner shall gi\"!:~ to existing lessees, local plannmg authOritIes and
owners of property that extends to within three hundred fc: et 0: the
designated urb:. n l: lnds notice of intentiCJn to classify the uroan Jands as
suitable for planning. Within thirty days after gi" ing notice. the com ·
missioner shall publish notice of intention to cbssiiy the urban lanes ; IS
suit..;. blc Jor urba~ planning st.: lling the time and place of the public
hearing for six publications in : l daily newspaper of gener:. 1 circulation in
the c: 1pit.: ll of this s:" 1. te and in the county in which the designated urban
]:; nds :::. re located. If there is no daily newspaper of general circul: l. lion
in the county in which the designated urban bnds nre located, the
required notice shall be published as many times within the thirty arty
period as t. he newspaper is published. The commissioner shall give
notice to ; omy person who requests notice of any classificat. ion made
uncE: r this section.
C.. In the notice required under subsection B, the commissioner shall
notify all existing lessees of st.: lte land within the boundaries of the are: l
under consider:-.. tion that such a designation may subsequently result in
recJassification of st.: lte lands within the boundaries of the designated
areas.
D. Within sixty cays after publication of notice under subsection B,
t.~ e commissioner or his designee shall conduct a public hearing in the
city, town or county in which the lands are located to receive : mc record
oral and written testimony concerning the classification of the design~ t.
ed urban lands as urban lands suitable for planning and possible plans
for development of those urban lands.
E. The commissioner may classify urban lands as urban lanes suit­able
for planning after determining from oral and written testimony
received that:
1. The department has met the notice and public he: aring requirf: ­ments
of subsections B, C and D.
2. The state lands being considered as urban lands suitable for
plam1ing are adjoining existing commercially or homesite developed lands
and which are either:
( a) Within the corporate boundaries of a city or town.
Co) Adjacent to the corporate boundaries of a city or town.
( c) Lands for which the designation as urban lands is requested
p~ rsuant to § Si- S31.01. .
s. The impact on the generation of revenue to the trust has been
considered.
~. The state lands being considered for urban lands suitable for
planning- would encourage infill in areas most beneficial to the trust and
prevent u:- ban sp:- awl or leapfrog development.
SLD- 65
Exhibit 17
Page 2 of 5
SLO- 66
Pursuant to authority of section .( 1- 130<. ­02,
unotice; nearinb:' requirements;" ",' as
acided to anc u; reb" ulation; duties o! cit-
§ 3i- 333. General plan; hearing-: appro\' al; amendment
A. On the classification of urban lands as urban lands suitable for
planning the commissioner shall cause a general plan to be prepared ior
the lands in question. The general plan shall define the app:- opriate uses
for the lands, proyide a general basis for a development plan and make
general policy statements related to the use and management of the
lands.
UlmAN LANDS DEVELOPMEST § 37- 333
Ch. 2
5. The urban lands under consideration for cJassific: ltion ns urban
lands suitable for planning arc located in areas where urban growth and
development are imminent.
6. Planning for urban growth and development is now : lppropriate.
7. The department has cooperated with the depnrtment of waier
resources to delermine that the urban lands have the quality : lnd
quantit: · of wate:: needed for urban development.
8. The proximity to olher developed areas and local jurisdictions is
taken into consideration.
9. The department h<? s fully cooperated with the local planning au­thorities
with jurisdiction over the area or areas in which the state urban
lands being considered are located.
10. All of the affected local planning authorities' development policies
have been taken into consideration by the department.
11. The classification is consistent with the local planning authorities'
development policies.
12. The proximity to and capacity of public facilities, induding streets
and highways, water supply systems, wastewater collection and treat­ment
systems, and other public facilities and se!"\' ices necessary to
support development, are considered_ .
13. It is in the best long- term interest of the trust to classify the
urban lands as suitable for planning.
14. The natural features of the land are taken into consideration.
15. The land depart.~ ent has the appropriated monies for a planning
contract for the urban lands being considered.
16. The impact to all existing leases in the area under consideration
and in the general area has been taken into consideration.
Added by Laws 1981, 1st S. S., Ch. 1, § 22.
exhibit 17 I
Page 3 of 5
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Historical KOle
panment and commissione~" "" as omitted
from the hu. clln; of this section. In suD­section
E, paral;.' raph 10, an apostrophe ..... as
addec to " authorities'" as correction of a
manifest cleri~ l error.
1981 Re" iser's Kote:
$:."- "" 3 ~ -. j t-,.. h.'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
PUBLIC LA~ l) S
Tille :\ i
B. Tilc (] cp:;:" lI11Cnt ~ 1i: iJJ cO(' fJ<: r: ltc with the loc:. l planning- : ltlthoriti<.: s
in the d('\"(: l(' j)::~ cl1t of the gencr~ J pl;; n. Till' department, in conjunction
wi:. h ::: lJ aHected Joc:;! planning- authorities, sh: 1ll, wilh ? ucqu;; te notice.
hold ;: t lezst one public hearing at which time thc proposed gcner: d pl: ll1
"" ill be openly discussed.
C. The gener;;} pl:: ln Sl13lJ consider : lne include references to:
1. : Types orland uses.
2. Comp: nibijit. y of t. he urb: ln lands for which the general pl: ln is
being prepared wit. h adjoining de\' clopment : lnd l:. nc usc.
3. Potent. i: lJ impacts on public facilities : lnd services and on the future
oc: m: lnd for such f: lciJities and services.
4. J.. \' ailabiJity of water of sufficient quality and quantity to support
ti, e proposed development
5.. Potentially ha: ardous <'. Teas, such as floodplains, geologic instabili­ties,
airpo:- t influence zones or other areas impact- cd by potentially
haz. a:- dous facilities.
6. Open space, greenbelts, recreational areas or other low intensity
' l1ses.
7. The identification of specific parts of the urban lands under
consideration for classification as urban lanes suiuble for planning that
should not be aeveloped or disturbed, such as natural areas, wildlife
habiuts, archaeological sites or historic sites and structures.
8. Timing of development.
9. Any other conside:- ations deemed reJe\' ant bJ' the commissioner
and the local planning authorities.
D. Prior to the appro\- al of a proposed general plan the commissioner
shall:
1. Conduct a public hearing on the plan_ The commissioner sha11 give
not. ice of the public hearing in L'le same manner as provided under
f 3i- 332, subsection B.
2. Determine whether the proposed plan is in the best interests of the
t.- us:'" The commissioner shall stat. e in writing the reasons for any
determinat. ion that a proposed general plan is detrimental to the interests
0: t..~ e trust..
E. ronowing the public hearing, the commissioner may approve the
p: oposec general plan. An appro-. ed general plan shall be t." Je b:-~ is for
future planning for an::: use of the affected urban lana:
to. roiiowinl;" app:- o\' aJ of the gener- al plan by t. he commissio;; er, no
amendment. or re\' isior; may be m. de withou · . t. he a'DD:- o\' al of the commi,. ·
sio: 1er. The commissioner' may a;; jlrove a propos~ 2 amendment or revi-
SLD - 67
Exhibit 17
Page 4 of 5
URBAS LA~ DS DE\' ELOP:\ 1E=-- T § 3i- 334
Ch. 2
sion of the general plan only after notification of and a meeting with the
local planning authority as to the nature of the proposed amendment or
revision. The commissioner may determine that a public hearing is
necessary. or the local planning authority may request such a hearing on
the proposed amendment or re\' ision. If eir. her the commissioner or the
local planning authority requests a public hearing, the proposed amend,
ment or revision shall not be adopted until after the hearing and
consideration by the commissioner and the local planning authority of the
information presented at the hearing. The commissioner shall give
notice of a public hearing on a proposed amendment or revision in the
same manner as pro\' idea under § 37- 332, subsection B. If neither the
commissioner nor the loc:: l. 1 planning authority determine' that a public
hearing is necessary, the commissioner may adopt the proposed amend ·
ment. or revision.' .
Added by uws " 1981, 1st S. S., eh. I, § 22.
I So in oril; in: l1. Probably should read " delermines".
SLD - 68
exhibit 17
Page 5 of 5
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
URBAN PLANNING RESTBUCTURE
The Urban Planning Division was created In response to the 1981 Urban Lands Act This Division
essentially serves a pro- actlve. long range planning function. In assistance to the Immediate disposal
orientation of the Land Disposition Division.
Division staff consist of the Director. a secretary. five Planner Ills based In Phoenix and a Planner
III and a Planner IV In Tucson. The latter also serves as office manager tor the Tucson office. although he
has no direct staff supervisory responslbUlties. These Planners are also identified as Project Managers, with
each being assigned an average of three to six projects.
The Urban Planning Division Is responsible for determining whether land should be classified as
ready and appropriate for development, for creating an initial. general plan for the land. and then for working
with other entities such as cities or private developers In developing a relatively detailed " development plan, "
A prior recommendation " Urban Planning - Stages Consolidation" has been submitted calling for
combining the first two of these planning processes, which will result In a significant time savings for the
Urban Planning Division staff, thereby moving the process forward at a taster pace.
During the course of gathering information In SLD the SUM Team was frequently advised there are
enough major parcels of land already planned to keep the marketing ( Land Disposition) staff In supply
through the end of this century.
Although considerable work Is required to maintain contact with projects In process, as well as to
monitor future developments within the state, from the above Information It appears there Is not sufficient
work to justify the current staffing.
to carry out existing and required new assignments wHl be further reduced. Adding to that the impact of
SLD- 69
an adequate computer word processing network system ( see recommendation - Data Processingj will further
diminish time maritates.
At present, It appears staff of this DMslon, having completed the primary thrust of the Act, and the
purpose for which the DMslon was created, are now at a point where this large a Staff, and a separate
DMslon, are no longer justified.
In light of these observations It is therefore recommended to:
• eliminate two Planner III ( Grade 21) positions In the Phoenix office
• eliminate a Planner IV ( Grade 22) positions in the Tucson office
• Place the Urban Planning functions within a newly created - Resource Protection Division,- as
detailed In the recommendation - Reorganization of State Land Departmenf
• Eliminate the Division Director's ( Grade 23) position.
The benefits to be obtained from Implementing this recommendation Include:
• Consolidation of work activities, thereby enhancing the efficiency of those performing those
functions and the delivery of the end product
• Savings of two pay grade 21 positions at $ 48,505 annual, for $ 97,010
• Savings of one pay grade 22 at $ 52,998 annual
• Savings of one pay grade 23 at $ 58,089 annual
• Total savings of $ 208,097 annual.
SLD - 70
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Implementation of this recommendation wUl require creating the designated new Section, and
eliminating the identified positions.
• Time required: Approximately 3 months.
SLO - 71
BROKERAGE FEES
A. R. S. 37- 132 empowers the State Land Commissioner to - promote the Infill and order1y
development of state lands In areas beneficial to the trust and prevent any urban sprawl or leapfrog
development on state lands.-
Under this authority the Urban Planning DMslon works with developers, with cities and counties,
or on their own Initiative to perform long range development planning for the use of State Trust Lands
adjacent to developing urban communities. Those plans Incorporate the disposition of Trust Lands, either
by sale ( generally reserved for residential developers) or long- term leases ( usually done with commercial
properties).
The Department Is not allowed, at present, to pay a brokerage fee to real estate agents who may
wish to promote the lease or purchase of these lands within the purview of the development planning which
has been completed. HB 2524, Introduced February 12, 1992, ( see Exhibit 18) on page 2, IInes 28 through
33, offers language to correct this situation.
Since brokers are not allowed, at present, to receive a fee from SLO, their Interest Is minimal in
promoting the sale or lease of these Trust Lands ( by which the - highest and best use" is obtained for the
Beneficiaries). In fact, If there Is a competitive piece of privately owned property, their efforts will be directed
to the sale of the private property in deference - and frequently In direct opposition - to the Trust Land.
When there Is a competing sales Interest In an area, especially In the restricted real estate markets
which exist today, the broker obviously must promote that property transaction which will result In
remuneration to the broker. If that means presenting a negative view of the competing state land
transaction, such negative view is apt to be offered to potential buyers.
SLO does not have sufficient staff to serve as a - rront line" sales force, aggressively promoting
the Interests of the state In regard to these planned developments. Even though significant zoning fees, as
much as $ 1,200 per zoning action, may already have been paid, acquisition of that property with resultant
reimbursement to the SLO fund, wIIi be significantly retarded.
SLO - 72
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
It Is therefore recommended that:
• The legislature be strongly encouraged to pass HB 2524, In Its present form
• Procedures be established by which up to a 3% brokerage fee may be paid to real estate
agents who aggressively and successfully market selected parcels of state land
• A detaUed record be maintained to evaluate the positive effects of paying these brokerage
fees, to serve as a reliable data base for determining the value of continuing or discontinuing
this authority.
The benefits to be obtained from this recommendation Include:
• The proposal to allow SLD to directly pay up to a 3% brokerage fee will strongly encourage
agents to represent state land transactions, and will enhance the completion of these
planned developments on which the Department has expended considerable time and effort,
as directed by statute
• Accelerated sales or lease of state lands, estimated to result in several million dollars ( not
easily calculated) during the coming years
Implementation of this recommendation requires:
• Passage of HB 2524, essentially as Introduced on February 12, 1992
SLD - 73
I
• Establishment of appropriate Procedures to ensure the swift and effective utDization of the I
provisions of this bUl, upon Its passage I
• Time: 6 months.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SLD - 74 I
I
SLO - 75
Introduced By
Representatives Hooper, Guenther, Senator Hill: Representatives Bee,
Beezley, Burns R, Celaya, Evans, Senators' Arzberger, Todd
AN ACT
AMENDING SECTION 37- 132, ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES; RELATING TO STATE LAND
SALES AND LEASES.
1 Be it enacted by the Legislature of the State of Arizona:
2 Section 1. Section 37- 132, Arizona Revise~ Statutes, is amended to
3 read:
4 37- 132. Powers and duties
5 A. The commissioner shall:
6 1. Exercise and perform all powers and duties vested in or imposed
7 upon the department, and prescribe such rules as are necessary to
8 discharge those duties.
9 2. Exercise the powers of surveyor- general except for the powers of
10 the surveyor- general exercised by the treasurer as a member of the
11 selection board pursuant to section 37- 202.
12 3. Make long- range plans for the future use of state lands in
13 cooperation with other state agencies, } ocal planning authorities and
14 political subdivisions.
15 4. Promote the infill and orderly development of state lands in
16 areas beneficial to the trust and prevent any urban sprawl or leapfrog
17 development on state lands.
18 5. Classify and appraise all state lands, together with the
19 improvements thereon, for the purpose of sale, lease or grant of
20 rights- of- way. The commissioner may impose such conditions and covenants
21 and make such reservations in the sale of state lands as he deems to be in
22 the best interest of the state. Grants of rights- of- way to governmental
23 agencies or political subdivisions of this state for cash without public
24 auction shall be made only for public road or highway or for municipal or
2S cuunLy airport or community college purposes and on condition of reverS10n
26 to this state if the rights- of- way cease to be used for these purposes.
Exhibit 18
Page 1 of 3
Natural Resources & Agriculture
Ucensing, Professions & Tourism
Rules _
Referred on February 12, 1992
REFERENCE TITLE: state land sales; broker
participation
HOUSE
HB 2524
Introduced
February 12, 1992
STATE OF ARIZONA
40th LEGISLATURE
SECOND REGULAR SESSION
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
HB2524
Exhibit 18 I
Page 2 of 3 1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
The prOV1Slons of this paragraph shall be subject to hearing and judicial
review procedures pursuant to title 12, chapter 7, article 6.
6. Have authority to lease for grazing, agricultural, homesite or
other purposes, except commercial, all land owned or held in trust by the
state.
7. Have authority to lease for commercial purposes and sell all
land owned or held in trust by the state, but any such lease for
commercial purposes or any such sale shall first be approved by the board
of appeals pursuant to section 37- 214.
8. Except as otherwise provided, determine all disputes, grievances
or other questions pertaining to the administration of state lands.
9. Appoint such deputies and other assistants and employees
necessary to perform t! I~ duties of the department, assign their duties,
and require of them such surety bonds as he deems proper. The
compensation of the deputy, assistants or employees shall be as determined
pursuant to section 38- 611.
10. Make a written report to the governor annually, not later than
September 1, disclosing in detail the activities of the department for the
preceding fiscal year, and publish it for distribution. The report shall
include an evaluation of auctions of state land leases held during the
preceding fiscal year considering the advantages and disadvantages to the
state trust of the existence and exercise of preferred rights to lease
reclassified state land.
B. The commissioner may:
1. Take evidence relating to, and may require of the various county
officers information on, any matter which he has the power to investigate
or determine.
2. THROUGH ,19 AND UNDER SUCH RULES AS THE
COMMISSIONER ADOPTS, USE PRIVATE REAL ESTATE BROKERS TO ASSIST IN ANY SALE
OR LONG TERM LEASE OF STATE LAND AND PAY, FROM FEES COLLECTED UNDER
SECTION 37- 108, SUBSECTION A, PARAGRAPH 10, SUBDIVISION ( a), ACOMMISSION
Of: NOT MOR&- THAN THREE PER CENT OF THt- PYRfHASE PRiCE TO AN'( - B~ ER THAT
P- ROVH) E~ THE S8CCESSFUl BIDDER, OTHER THAN TilE BRe~ R, /\ T /\ UCTIO~
C. The commissioner or any deputy or employee of the department
shall not have, own or acquire, directly or indirectly, any state lands or
the products thereon, any interest in or to such lands or products, or
improvements on leased state lands, or be interested in any state
irrigation project affecting state lands.
SLD - 76
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Fort ieth Leg is1ature Exhibit 18
Second Regul ar Sess i on Page 3 of 3
PROPOSED
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES AMENDMENTS TO H. B. 2524
( Reference to printed bill)
1 Page 2, strike lines 32 and 33, and insert " TO ABROKER LICENSED PURSUANT TO
2 TITLE 32, CHAPTER 20, THAT PROVIDES THE PURCHASER OR LESSEE AT AUCTION.
3 THE PURCHASER OR LESSEE AT AUCTION IS NOT ELIGIBLE TO RECEIVE A
4 COMMISSION PURSUANT TO THIS SUBSECTION."
5 Amend title to conform
ROGER HOOPER
SLD - n
2/ 25/ 92
cla
RIGHTS- OF- WAY APPYCAT10NS UNITS
Under authority of A. R. S. 37- 132. A. 5, the State Land Department ( SLD) Is authorized to make
-... Grants of rights- of- way to governmental agencies or political subdMslons of this state for cash without
public auction ... only for public road or highway or for municipal or county airport or community college
purposes ....
However, A. R. S. 37- 461.8 states: " When grant of a right- of- way or site amounts to the disposition
of or conveys a perpetual right to the use of the surface of the land, It shall be disposed of ... In conformity
with the requirements of law ....
Since placement of highways, either public or those providing access to subdMslons, require
perpetual conveyance, even though these usages are ones for which there are no competitive bids, and
there Is no negotiation regarding price once the matter has gone to auction ( that Is settled ahead of time),
there stili must be that pUblic auction compliance with state law.
The state Attorney General's office has Issued an oral opinion regarding a recent Supreme Court
decision declaring that perpetual road rights- of- way can be Issued only after 10 weeks of advertising, and
at pUblic auction. The ruling and Its Impacts are noted In a memorandum from the State Land Department
dated March 20,1992 ( see Exhibit 19, SLD Memorandum).
In - Notes of Decision" to the Constitution, Article X, Section 1, quoting language from State ex
rei. ArIzona Highway Dept. v. Lassen ( 1966) 87 S. Ot 584,385 U. S. 458, on remand 102 ArIz. 318,428 P. 2nd
996, it Is noted: - Under terms and purposes of grant In the New Mexico- ArIzona Enabling Act, Section 28,
ArIzona must actually compensate the trust In money for full appraised value of any material sites or rights­of-
way which it obtains on or over trust lands, which standard most nearly reproduces the resYIts of aYction
( emphasis added) prescribed by this Act ....
And, Attomey General Opinion No. 56- 106 Is quoted as stating: - State Land Department has a
right to amend the rules and regulations governing rights of way to grant a right- of- way without public
auction sale. - The Issue appearing to be solely one of the " perpetual conveyance- requirement of these
roads, and slmUarty situated easements and rights- of- way for exclusive use purposes.
SLD - 78
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The public auction requirements Incorporate ten weeks advertising In a fl8\ NSP8. P8r In the capitol
area, which has been Interpreted to mean the major Phoenix daUy papers. This advertising costs SLD ( and
litImately the applicant) approximately $ 1,200 per advertisement. There must also be advertising for the
same time period In a paper In the area In which the auction Is to be held, at varying costs.
The process of public auction also Involves a30 day waiting period from the time the public notice
Is advertised until the auction Is held, requires obtaining a place of auction ( usually the steps of the
courthouse In other than Maricopa and Pima Counties) and the requisite offlclal( s) to conduct the auction,
and all the documentation of the fact that It was held In accordance with law.
Significant expenses are accrued by the state In this activity, simply to grant a basically permanent
although minimally restrictive and totally non- competltlve use of the land, for public benefit. We are Informed
that, in all the years these auctions have been held, there have only been two occasions when a counter- bid
was submitted, and both those were " nuisance" bids.
When the " Master Appraisal" process which Is now being developed by the Chief Appraiser Is
completed, the required appraisals for these rights- of- way will be significantly simplified, with attendant cost
reductions ( not now calculated).
With 436 Right- of- Way Applications ( see exhibit 20, Right- of- Way Instruction and Application)
processed In FY 91, and 435 projected for FY 92, at a cost of $ 141.70 ( an average of 10.5 hours) each this
represents a cost of $ 61,639.50 to the state for these transactions. These figures do not, however, include
the actual costs of the auctioning process, such as preparing the n8' NSpaper advertisements, arranging for
their publication, making auction schedules and arrangements, and staff time to travel to, conduct and return
from the auctions. It may safely be assumed this will add approximately 25% more to the above designated
costs of these transactions.
The following actions are therefore recommended:
and when no competitive bids have been received, without necessity for public auction for
SLD- 79
any public utUIty use, commensurate with any required change to Article X of the
Constitution
• Procedures be Implemented for this simplified processing and granting rights- of- way for
roads and other such Involved usages
• The Chief Appraiser be encouraged to pursue the " Master Appraisal" project with the utmost
haste, and with necessary agency support.
Benefits to be obtained by implementing this recommendation include:
• Assuming only five of the 435 permits require an auction, 430 permits 1lQ! auctioned would
save the extra 25%, or about $ 35 each, for an approximate savings of $ 15,000
• Elimination of ( 10.5 hr. X 25% = 2.625 hr. X 435 =) 1,142 staff hours, thereby eliminating
one FTE
• Cost savings of $ 35,000 annually.
Implementation of this recommendation will requIre
• Creating the procedures by which the streamlined lease process for these lands will be
managed
• A review by the state Attomey General of the newly developed Rules
Potential amendment of the Constitution
SLD- SO
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
• Encouraging the Governor to request an expedited Opinion. to achieve implementation
within nine months
• Time: 9 to 14 months
SLD - 81
SLD · 82
Fiscal Impact: Over the last five years, the Department has sold
the following rights of way at pUblic auction with no competitive
bids ( averaged):
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
M. J. HASSELL
STATE LAND COMMISSIONER
Exhibit 19
Page 1 of 2
1616 WEST ADAMS
PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85007
i\ riZOlt< l
~ tate 1£ a'tth ~ epartment
MEMORANDUM
) .
William P. Foster, Directo
Land Disposition Division 0 \
Bill Fish, Manager
Right of Way section
Definition of Problem: Due to the Attorney General's oral opinion
of a recent Supreme Court decision, all perpetual p