The State and Local Arizona Documents (SALAD) collection contains documents published by the State of Arizona, its Counties, incorporated Cities or Towns, or affiliated Councils of Government; documents produced under the auspices of a state or local agency, board, commission or department, including reports made to these units; and Salt River Project, a licensed municipality. ASU is a primary collector of state publications and makes a concerted effort to acquire and catalog most materials published by state and local governmental agencies.

The ASU Digital Repository provides access to digital SALAD publications, however the ASU Libraries’ non-digitized Arizona documents can be searched through the ASU Libraries Catalog. For additional assistance, Ask A Government Documents Librarian.

Publications issued by the Morrison Institute for Public Programs at Arizona State University are also available in PRISM, in the Morrison Institute for Public Policy - Publications Archive collection.

Displaying 1 - 10 of 14
Filtering by

Clear all filters

41817-Thumbnail Image.png
ContributorsMokwa, Michael (Author) / McIntosh, Daniel (Author) / Eaton, John (Author) / Evans, Anthony (Author) / Hill, Kent (Author) / L. William Seidman Research Institute (Contributor)
Created2016-04-13
Description

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

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. 

41818-Thumbnail Image.png
ContributorsJames, Tim (Timothy Jon) (Author) / Evans, Anthony John (Author) / Madly, Eva (Author) / L. William Seidman Research Institute (Contributor)
Created2014-04-04
Description

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

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.

42070-Thumbnail Image.png
ContributorsArizona. Office of the Auditor General (Contributor)
Created2015-04
Description

The Arizona Medical Board has improved its licensing and registration processes, but should continue to follow them and conduct a risk-based review of previously issued licenses. Because it previously lacked adequate policies and procedures, the Board has retained a vendor to review the initial medical doctor licenses it issued between

The Arizona Medical Board has improved its licensing and registration processes, but should continue to follow them and conduct a risk-based review of previously issued licenses. Because it previously lacked adequate policies and procedures, the Board has retained a vendor to review the initial medical doctor licenses it issued between October 1, 2011 and February 5, 2014. The Board should also conduct a risk-based review of the initial MD licenses it issued between February 6, 2014 and June 16, 2014, and continue to follow its improved licensing and registration processes.

42965-Thumbnail Image.png
Created2013-09
Description

The Department of Environmental Quality is responsible for ensuring that owners and operators of petroleum underground storage tanks comply with federal and state financial responsibility requirements. These requirements help ensure that UST owners and operators can pay to clean up leaks and spills and compensate third parties for bodily injury

The Department of Environmental Quality is responsible for ensuring that owners and operators of petroleum underground storage tanks comply with federal and state financial responsibility requirements. These requirements help ensure that UST owners and operators can pay to clean up leaks and spills and compensate third parties for bodily injury and any property damage incurred. Sites and/or operators of petroleum USTs include service stations, convenience stores, and local governments. The Department continues to fail to ensure that UST owners and operators meet financial responsibility requirements. Although the Department has begun to take steps to identify and address some of the weaknesses with its financial responsibility program, it should take additional steps, including developing policies and procedures to ensure UST owners and operators comply with financial responsibility requirements.

43586-Thumbnail Image.png
ContributorsHoffman, Dennis L. (Author) / Hogan, Timothy D. (Author) / L. William Seidman Research Institute (Publisher)
Created2005-02
Description

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

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.

43588-Thumbnail Image.png
ContributorsRex, Tom R. (Author) / L. William Seidman Research Institute (Publisher)
Created2005-06
Description

The research for this report was conducted in two phases. The first phase analyzed the change in national job quality using multiple datasets, going back as far as 1970. In addition, the level and change in job quality was estimated for one state (Arizona). Some inconsistencies in the measurement of

The research for this report was conducted in two phases. The first phase analyzed the change in national job quality using multiple datasets, going back as far as 1970. In addition, the level and change in job quality was estimated for one state (Arizona). Some inconsistencies in the measurement of job quality exist across datasets. Complete results of this analysis, with a strong focus on Arizona data, are available in the report "Job Quality in Arizona". The second phase analyzed data for all states but was limited to two datasets, one presenting industrial data, the other occupational data. Because of the limited availability of state data by occupation, the time period analyzed was restricted to the years 2000 and 2003. The level of job quality in 2003 and the change between 2000 and 2003 are presented. The findings of the second phase, initially reported in "Job Quality in Arizona Compared to All States", are included in the current report, excluding detail provided for Arizona in the original report. Additional national and regional analyses are included in the current report.

43589-Thumbnail Image.png
ContributorsRex, Tom R. (Author) / L. William Seidman Research Institute (Publisher)
Created2005-06
Description

The best way to evaluate job quality would be to analyze a dataset that presents both occupational and industrial data, but the only dataset of this nature available by state comes from the decennial census. It is severely limited by small sample size, the latest data are for 1999, and

The best way to evaluate job quality would be to analyze a dataset that presents both occupational and industrial data, but the only dataset of this nature available by state comes from the decennial census. It is severely limited by small sample size, the latest data are for 1999, and the 1999 data are not consistent with the 1989 data. Thus, the initial work by the Seidman Institute on job quality ("Job Quality in Arizona", March 2005, presented data on Arizona job quality from several sources of either industrial or occupational data. "Job Quality in Arizona Compared to All States" is an extension of the March 2005 report. Arizona’s job quality in the latest year and its change over time is compared to the national average and is ranked among the 51 “states” (including the District of Columbia).

42004-Thumbnail Image.png
Created2015-09
Description

Authority can more clearly report its economic development impact and enhance its processes for awarding and monitoring grants.

Created2005 to 2016
Description

The Office of the Auditor General is a legislative agency under the direction of the Joint Legislative Audit Committee. The Office provides information to the Legislature and various other governmental entities, which assists them in overseeing operations, improving their financial management and effectiveness, and giving the public a measure of

The Office of the Auditor General is a legislative agency under the direction of the Joint Legislative Audit Committee. The Office provides information to the Legislature and various other governmental entities, which assists them in overseeing operations, improving their financial management and effectiveness, and giving the public a measure of accountability.