Morrison Institute for Public Policy Publications Archives

This paper, drawing upon historical data and information from surveys and interviews with more than 50 legislators, lobbyists, and knowledgeable observers, finds that the term limits reform adopted by the Arizona voters in 1992 has caused legislators to make some painful adjustments. Because of term limits many legislators have decided to run for another office prior to the expiration of their terms. This has often meant trying to move from the one legislative house to another, most commonly from the House to the Senate. On the plus side, the report finds that term limits have encouraged greater competition for legislative and other seats and have given voters a greater choice among candidates. To some extent, limits have been a force toward a more inclusive governing process. At the same time, they have generally reduced the power of legislative leaders and generally increased the influence of lobbyists and staff, though not all lobbyists and staff have gained equally. Recent newcomers to the Arizona Legislature are probably not any less knowledgeable than previous classes of newcomers, but under term limits there are more newcomers and members have less time to learn their jobs. For many, the limit to four two-year terms (eight years total) provides too little time to learn how to do the job and do it well.

Economic development leaders and public officials throughout the country are tending to the effects of a sour economy and huge state budget deficits when they would rather be creating quality jobs and new economy assets. According to the most prominent thinking on today’s knowledge economy, locally developed and exported technology will be the primary economic differentiator between future winners and losers. Thus, with long-term fiscal and economic health at stake, the 50-state race is on for advantages and leadership in science and technology. This report sheds light on these issues through an overview of Arizona’s standing in science and technology today, short case studies of four competitors in the west, as well as Arizona, and ideas for Arizona’s leaders to consider as they strive to give our state an edge.

In the spring of 1998, the Office of Workforce Development Policy (OWDP) of the Arizona Department of Commerce commissioned a statewide opinion poll to assess public attitudes toward the state’s plan for economic development as implemented through GSPED — the Governor’s Strategic Partnership for Economic Development. The poll was designed to assess both the public’s understanding of GSPED and their reactions to using the concept of industry clusters as a tool for organizing both economic and workforce development efforts.

One question posed by members of the Governors’ Council on Workforce Development Policy pertained
to whether polling results vary by urban versus rural residency. Specifically, the question was raised as to whether the responses of rural residents differ from those who live in urban areas. Therefore, at the request of the Council, results of the polling were analyzed in order to answer the question: Does urban versus rural residency affect respondents' answers? The answer to this question is, in short, No.

In the spring of 1998, the Office of Workforce Development Policy (OWDP) of the Arizona Department of Commerce commissioned a statewide opinion poll to assess public attitudes toward the state’s plan for economic development as implemented through GSPED — the Governor’s Strategic Partnership for Economic Development. The poll was designed to assess both the public’s understanding of GSPED and their reactions to using the concept of industry clusters as a tool for organizing both economic and workforce development efforts.

Because of the urgency of workforce issues and the desire to begin a statewide discussion about workforce goals and choices, the Governor’s Council on Workforce Policy wanted to understand if, and how, program governance and organization are hampering progress and what changes might be beneficial. The council asked Morrison Institute for Public Policy (School of Public Affairs, College of Public Programs, Arizona State University) to: (1) Explore the strengths and weaknesses of the organization of Arizona’s workforce system, particularly at the state level (2) Review how other states have revamped their systems and connected workforce and economic development (3) Recommend options for improving Arizona’s system During the second half of 2003, Morrison Institute for Public Policy talked with more than 60 workforce professionals, business people, and workforce board members across Arizona either individually or in small groups, researched other states’ approaches through interviews with officials in other states and national organizations, analyzed responses to an online survey of selected local workforce investment board members, and reviewed a wide variety of materials on economic, workforce, and community development. This report is the first of many steps for Arizona to reflect and act on workforce development governance and its system, because as Thurgood Marshall said, "You can’t stand still. You must move, and if you don’t move, they will run over you."

The fourth, and final, annual statewide public opinion polling is part of a multifaceted evaluation of Arizona's school to work (STW) initiative. Baseline data were established in spring 1996; comparative data have been collected annually since then. The polling assesses public attitudes toward STW, and determines their level of support or opposition to the initiative. Each year, three constituent groups were polled: parents, businesses, and educators. Sample sizes in 1999 yielded results comparable with those in 1996, 1997, and 1998 results. Findings indicate the following: public awareness of STW has grown significantly during the past 4 years; awareness of involvement in a regional partnership has grown; most Arizonans are satisfied with the overall quality of public schools, but are least satisfied with those aspects of education that relate more closely to STW, and are in favor of changes in public schools that support STW outcomes; and many Arizonans are skeptical that STW "can work." Clear majorities of Arizonans support STW on every indicator of support measured, including the following: willingness to pay taxes to support STW; willingness to vote for pro-STW elected officials; identification of STW participation as "very important" in the lives of students; indication that one would change schools to allow a child to participate in STW; and support to include STW in the state's budget.

As part of a multi-faceted evaluation of the state's STW initiative, a survey was conducted to establish baseline measures of counselors' time use and attitudes toward STW prior to its widespread implementation in Arizona schools. This paper discusses counselors' roles and responsibilities--that is, how they currently spend their time. The study will be replicated annually, with the hypothesis that if STW has the impact intended, then one should see marked increases in the time spent counseling students on work/career issues.

One component of a multi-faceted evaluation of the state's STW initiative is the evaluation of public awareness and opinions of STW as a concept and a vehicle for education reform. In spring 1996, a statewide public poll of parents, businesses and educators was conducted to establish baseline measures of public attitudes toward STW prior to widespread implementation in the schools. In fall 1996, Arizona public school counselors were surveyed as an additional constituent group. This paper highlights findings from the state's baseline study of counselors' opinions toward STW -- especially as compared with the opinions of other constituent groups.

Since 1996, Arizona has been building a comprehensive statewide system of school-to-work opportunities for students from kindergarten through college, supported by a School-to-Work (STW) implementation grant from the U.S. Departments of Labor and Education. After 3 years, a public opinion poll of a 2,200-person random sample drawn from parents, businesses, and educators sought information on these five topics: (1) public awareness of the STW initiative, (2) perceived need for school change; (3) reactions to specific changes embodied by STW; (4) specific attitudes toward STW; and (5) support for the STW initiative.

The polling data showed that awareness of STW among educators is up; increasing percentages of parents and educators report being involved in a regional partnership; and there are high levels of support for changes in the public school system, types of learning programs needed, STW implementation, and the changes in school operations that STW signifies. Educators are increasingly viewing STW as a broad-based career exploration and preparation initiative designed to meet the needs of all students.

Support for STW is also growing along the lines of public policy, tax-paying readiness, and candidate support. On the other hand, fewer businesses than in the past report being aware of STW or involved in local school efforts, although a majority of businesses polled continue to express high levels of support for STW,. More businesses view STW as a program that is limited in scope, serves only select students, and is likely to fail because of entrenched bureaucracy, and growing numbers of parents and teachers are beginning to share these views. The study concluded that policy-level action is needed to keep STW alive in Arizona.

Artist Wayne Rainey’s Shade magazine is a good sign for the Maricopa region. The bi-monthly publication covers contemporary art and culture, supports downtown redevelopment efforts, and works with many institutions to encourage the arts. However, as promising as Shade and other inventive ventures are, the fact remains that the Maricopa metropolitan region is just waking up to the need to recognize and support arts and culture as a critical contributor to a knowledge economy.

At one time, arts and culture have intrinsic value, economic value, and value as tools to further an all-important “sense of place” as well as to aid in such areas as workforce development, education, and community revitalization. As a result, arts and culture both enrich residents’ lives and give places meaning, identity, and economic opportunity.

This report provides statistics and information that give a sense of local arts and culture resources and challenges in the areas of 1) performing, literary, and visual arts; 2) history and preservation; 3) science and nature; 4) landmarks and events.