Arizona State and Local Government Documents Collection

The 2016 College Football Playoff National Championship Game was held on January 11, 2016, in Glendale, Arizona. The W. P. Carey School of Business at Arizona State University was commissioned to conduct an economic impact assessment of the Game and events surrounding it, including the impact of direct and indirect visitor and organizational expenditures. This study utilized multiple research, survey and analytical methodologies. This report will outline the methodologies used and the results obtained in the study and the economic impact. 

This study examines the economic impact of the Central Arizona Project (CAP) to the State of Arizona in two aspects: the construction of CAP, 1973‐1993; and the impact of CAP's water supply delivery operations, 1986‐2010. A modified IMPLAN input‐output model for the State of Arizona is used to implement both analyses. The economic impacts for each analysis are assessed in terms of gross state product (GSP) and employment.

There are two distinct components to the economic development activities described in ADOH’s LIHTC program details. The first component is activity that strengthens the economy. This is the quantifiable activity that is the subject of this report. The second component is community building activity which can be both quantitative and qualitative. This is an area that should be considered in the debate but which is not addressed within this report.

The Arizona Water Banking Authority was created in 1996 to store the unused portion of Arizona’s annual allocation of the Colorado River. By storing this unused water the AWBA secures a dependable water supply necessary to ensure the state’s long-term prosperity. The plan is intended to govern the operations of the AWBA over the course of the entire calendar year.

The Arizona Water Banking Authority was created in 1996 to store the unused portion of Arizona’s annual allocation of Colorado River water. Until the AWBA was created, Arizona had not fully utilized its 2.8 million acre-foot allocation of Colorado River water and the state’s leaders recognized that leaving a portion of Arizona’s allocation in the river was a lost opportunity. The AWBA was created to provide assurances that water users within the state had secure, long-term water supplies.

For those interested in one of the most extreme state tax and expenditure limitations, TABOR – Colorado’s initiative that limits the funding of most expenditures to annual revenue growth restrained by the sum of annual population growth and inflation rates – would seem to be exactly the right choice. To some, the initiative simply limits government to spend within its means. However, the analysis in this paper reveals that, true to the language in the 1992 Colorado initiative, TABOR limits government growth, and over time the public sector, as a share of the overall economy, declines sharply – crowding out opportunities for investments in strategic initiatives or opportunities for tax reform that may be popular with large voter constituencies or the business community. Advocates point out that provisions in TABOR do allow for voter overrides, but these are costly in both time and money, and until the overrides take place, government is
hamstrung. A simpler, more efficient alternative would be to elect fiscally conservative legislators and hold them accountable for prudent fiscal decisions that strike the right balance between a tax base conductive to economic growth and strategic investments that provide public sector infrastructure, nurturing the business climate and promoting the health and well-being of the citizenry. The paper first outlines the TABOR amendment in Colorado and examines its fiscal consequences for that state. It then examines the potential impact of a TABOR in Arizona.