Arizona State and Local Government Documents Collection

The wild land/urban interface is a concern in Coconino County because of the potential for wild land fuels to ignite combustible structures and vice-versa. Destroying homes, property, and trees is just one way that wildfire harms an area. Wildfires can destroy habitat, soils, and forest health, disrupting economic stability, transportation corridors, recreation opportunities, water supplies, and scenery, as well as undermining a community’s emotional and spiritual well-being. Reducing the threat of catastrophic wildfire is a priority in the wild land/urban interface. This plan outlines actions needed to prepare and equip the greater Flagstaff community to live and thrive within our fire-adapted ponderosa pine forests.

This document is intended to give an overview of the Federal-Aid Program and its impacts on Arizona. There are four major sections in the report: (1) Overview of the Federal-Aid Program; (2) Arizona Federal funding highlights for the fiscal year; (3) Federal-aid Highway Program Characteristics; and (4) Federal-Aid Highway Program descriptions. The first section gives a general overview of how the Federal-Aid Program is financed, the authorization process and a discussion of the apportionment, allocation and obligation authority processes. The second section deals with Arizona Federal funding highlights the for fiscal year. The last two sections are devoted to characteristics of the core programs, including eligibility, limitations, apportionment formulas and descriptions of the funding categories.

The Arizona Department of Transportation was authorized in 1996 to administer a State Infrastructure Bank under a cooperative agreement with the Federal Highway Administration. The Highway Expansion and Extension Loan Program (HELP) was established. The financial statements present only the funds comprising the Fund and are not intended to present fairly the financial position or results of operations of the Department.

The HELP program is meant to be a funding tool to accelerate needed highway projects throughout the state. Board Funding Obligations are an important part of the HELP capitalization and the current stress on the State's General Fund has impacted our ability to use BFOs as a funding source for new loans. Though $140 million of BFOs are authorized by statute to capitalize the HELP, the State Treasurer was required to call all outstanding BFOs in April 2009. Consequently, the State Transportation Board and the Department have suspended the HELP program given the uncertainty of a long term funding source.

Since 1986, the Arizona Department of Transportation has used a comprehensive regression-based econometric model to estimate Transportation Excise Tax revenues for Maricopa County. These revenues, which flow into the Regional Area Road Fund (RARF), are the major funding source for the Maricopa County Freeway Program. This document contains the official forecast of expected values for the Maricopa County Transportation Excise Tax as developed by the Arizona Department of Transportation in cooperation with the Maricopa Association of Governments, Valley Metro and Valley Metro Rail.

The State of Arizona taxes motor fuels and collects a variety of fees relating to the registration and operation of motor vehicles in the state. These collections include gasoline and use fuel taxes, motor carrier fees, vehicle license taxes, motor vehicle registration fees, and other miscellaneous fees. These revenues are deposited in the Arizona Highway User Revenue Fund and are then distributed to the cities, towns and counties of the State and to the State Highway Fund, which is administered by the Department. These taxes and fees represent a source of revenues available to the state for highway related expenses.

The State of Arizona taxes motor fuels and collects fees relating to the registration and operation of motor vehicles. These taxes and fees include gasoline and use fuel taxes, motor carrier fees, motor vehicle registration fees, vehicle license taxes, and other miscellaneous fees. Revenues are deposited in the Arizona Highway User Revenue Fund and are then distributed to the cities, towns and counties and to the State Highway Fund. These taxes and fees are a major source of revenue to the state for highway construction, improvements, and other related expenditures.

In September 2005, some concerned Walker residents contacted the Arizona Department of Health Services in regards to the quality of groundwater in the area. The residents petitioned ADHS to perform well water tests to determine the character of the water, and whether there is any potential health risk associated with consuming or using the water. In response to the concerned community members and in agreement with the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, ADHS collected water samples from the site and completed a health consultation. This health consultation evaluates if the levels of lead and other metals in the private wells in Walker area pose any adverse health effects.

The Stoneridge subdivision is a growing rural community with approximately 5,000 residents. The Prescott Valley Water Company (Prescott Valley, AZ) provides drinking water for residents in this area. A resident in the community indicated that there is a “paint thinner” type odor coming from the tap water. The Prescott Valley Water Company sampled the water due to request of the resident. On July 27, 2004, the resident called the Arizona Department of Health Services to express his/her concern regarding the analytical results of benzene in tap water samples collected from faucets inside the house. As a result, the Arizona Department of Health Services completed a health consultation to evaluate if benzene and other volatile organic compounds in the water supplied by the Prescott Valley Water Company pose any adverse health effects.

In August 2001, a resident of New River contacted the Arizona Department of Health Services, Office of Environmental Health to request information on the health risks of arsenic in drinking water. The resident collected two well water samples and submitted them to a private laboratory for arsenic analysis. The analyses detected arsenic at 560 and 600 μg/L. To confirm these very high arsenic results, ADHS staff sampled the well for arsenic and submitted the samples for analysis by the ADHS State Laboratory. Arsenic was detected at 340 μg/L. After that, a large number of people requested health advice on arsenic in their well water. This public health consultation primarily evaluates arsenic levels found in private wells and documents health advice provided to well owners. When other metals were found at levels of concern, health advice was provided to well owners regarding exposure to those metals too.