Morrison Institute for Public Policy Publications Archives
Morrison Institute for Public Policy is a leader in examining critical Arizona and regional issues, and is a catalyst for public dialogue. An Arizona State University resource, Morrison Institute is an independent center that uses nonpartisan research and communication outreach to help improve the state's quality of life.
Morrison Institute is part of the College of Public Programs in the School of Public Affairs at Arizona State University. Additional publications are available at the Morrison Institute for Public Policy. Date range of repository publications is 1992 – 2015.
Filtering by
- All Subjects: Criminal justice, Administration of
- All Subjects: Finance, Public
- All Subjects: Local transit
Public finance—taxes and other revenues collected by government and the expenditure of those revenues—always has been somewhat controversial because of wide philosophical differences among residents regarding the role that government should play in providing public services and in collecting taxes and fees from its residents. Recently, public finance in Arizona has become a prominent public issue due to the need to resolve the deficits that afflict state government and most county and municipal governments in Arizona.
Arizona’s prison population is on the rise and the current fiscal year General Fund has $880 million budgeted for corrections. Read the series debut of Indicator Insight to learn about trends in crime rates, juvenile arrests, and recidivism.
Numerous tax cuts over the last 15 years have substantially reduced revenue to the Arizona state general fund and greatly narrowed the tax base.
Arizona’s most significant criminal-justice trend of the 2000s has been the enormous growth of the state’s prison population, which far outpaced state population growth and continued upward even as the rate of major crimes dropped. In this edition, the author explores Arizona incarceration trends into the next decade.
A grassroots dialogue-to-action program designed to inspire bottom-up collaboration on issues of domestic violence proved to be a success and several important lessons were learned to help full implementation. This briefing evaluates the pilot program of the Purple Ribbon Study Circles Project, which ran in six cities in Greater Phoenix from September through December 2008.
This second criminal justice brief is, like the first, based upon further analysis of the data gathered in the preparation of Layers of Meaning: Domestic Violence and Law Enforcement Attitudes in Arizona. The findings presented here expand on the findings and issues presented in the full report. The aim of this briefing is to present additional information and analysis in support of Arizona's ongoing public conversation about reducing and preventing domestic violence.
Domestic violence (DV) ranks among the most common 911 calls to police statewide. And a new report reveals that the victims making the calls – and the professionals working in Arizona’s criminal-justice system – say the state’s response is at risk of failing. System Alert: Arizona’s Criminal Justice Response to Domestic Violence, published by the Morrison Institute for Public Policy at Arizona State University, finds that, despite important strides made over the past three decades, the Arizona’s criminal justice system is too often falling short of its goals of achieving victim safety and offender accountability.
Believing that voters might support transit if they felt like an integral part of the transit proposal decision-making process, the Phoenix Chamber of Commerce's Valleywide Transit Task Force set out in early 1995 to initiate a bottom-up process which would enable people to say, "here's what we want." The Task Force agreed that the first step in the process was to initiate a new dialogue. the Morrison Institute for Public Policy was asked to write a briefing paper, which would re-invigorate the transit debate. The resulting report, "Transit in the Valley: Where Do We Go From Here?" painted a bleak picture of the Valley's existing transit system and challenged many long-held conventional wisdoms. The dialogue had begun. The report was then presented to the citizens of 17 Valley cities and towns for their consideration in 16 public meetings sponsored by cities and their local Chambers of Commerce. In community forums conducted between October 1996 and February 1997, more than 500 Valley residents discussed the Valley's transit future. This document summarizes the questionnaire responses by 501 people who attended the forums.
In the Valley, developing viable long-term transit from where we are currently will be very difficult if key
components continue to remain unaligned. Thus, before getting to the primary purpose of this report, it is important to first establish the players and basic considerations relevant to the effectiveness of a transit system.
Few would dispute that the Phoenix metropolitan area is severely lacking in terms of mass-transit compared to other similarly sized and configured cities. The Valley’s fleet of roughly 400 buses is about one-third of the service found in San Diego, Atlanta, and Seattle. In addition, most of Phoenix’ peer regions either already have, or are planning rail systems. Of the 30 largest metropolitan areas in the U.S., only six -- Phoenix included -- do not currently have or are not planning to add rail to their transit system.
This brief, the third issue in the "Criminal Justice Issues for Arizona" series, reveals that Pinal County's specialized court for domestic-violence cases offers some promising results for dealing with this common and complex offense. This report contains an analysis of data collected in the Pinal County Domestic Violence Database, which as of April 2008 contained 666 case records of domestic-violence offenders who were processed by one of the three courts. The database also contained information on a comparison group of offenders; however, these offenders are not included in this analysis because of insufficient numbers. Court officials are currently developing a more appropriate comparison group for use in a subsequent analysis. Table 3 presents the frequency and percent of offenses by levels of education: 8th grade and below, some high school, high school diploma, some college, college graduate, post-graduate degree, and unknown. Key findings include: (1) Offenders showed a significant increase in their self-reported coping abilities and in their satisfaction with the criminal-justice system during their period of supervision; (2) Offenders showed a significant decrease in their self-reported propensity for abusiveness to an intimate partner during their period of supervision; and (3) Only 9% of offenders committed another offense while in the program.