Morrison Institute for Public Policy Publications Archives

This year, Arizona Directions assesses the health of both ends of the P-20 spectrum: early childcare and education and the high school /postsecondary-to-industry nexus. Both are viewed through the lens of Arizona’s current competitive position and its trajectory through the broader economic landscape. How well does Arizona regulate, promote and ensure equitable access to quality early childcare and to programs that help children enter Kindergarten ready to learn? Does Arizona’s production of graduates and skilled workers align with current and projected industry needs? In other words, are we setting our children up to succeed in the new global economy? At the same time, are we creating a talent pool that will help Arizona stand out as the place to start and grow a business? Arizona Directions’ data-driven approach enables Arizonans to step back and examine the evidence without the distraction of clashing political rhetoric. The report is designed to create a common reference point for civil discourse and post-partisan, collaborative approaches to improving Arizona’s competitiveness. Still, the data are merely the kindling. Many minds are needed to stoke the fire and convert its energy into real-world results.

This is the fourth in a series of briefs in which Morrison Institute for Public Policy will report on selected aspects of Arizona’s child welfare system. Morrison Institute’s first white paper discussed the less visible but more common side of child maltreatment: neglect. The second white paper examined family conditions that can influence a family’s subtle “drift” towards unsafe situations that often correlate with neglect, as well as how different types of prevention might help interrupt the “drift into failure.” The third paper analyzed Arizona Department of Child Safety data to identify the prevalence of various types of neglect in Arizona reports. This paper highlights some key conclusions from the neglect analysis and identifies future areas for study and analysis as part of the Spotlight on Arizona’s Kids project. Future papers will research, analyze and discuss prevention services in Arizona and elsewhere, with an emphasis on best practices. These collective efforts are intended to help state leaders, child advocates and others discuss and identify the most-effective child abuse and neglect prevention strategies. Spotlight on Arizona’s Kids is funded by the Arizona Community Foundation

For a century, Arizona has pursued prosperity through outward expansion of its urban areas. In metropolitan Phoenix and elsewhere, “growth” has meant developing raw land with new houses, new shopping centers, and new industrial parks--and the metropolitan “frontier” has moved farther outward from downtown every year. This has not been uniformly true, of course. Some cities--Phoenix, Tempe, and Scottsdale especially--have been grappling with the question of revitalizing older urban neighborhoods for many years. But the “outside game” has been the predominant development pattern in the Valley of Sun for many decades. And the Phoenix region has played this game better than one might think, creating many high-quality master-planned communities, protecting lots of open space, using impact fees to build good infrastructure. In other words, Phoenix has used the “outside game” to create a region so attractive it continues to be one of the fastest-growing metropolises in America. But in order for cities to play a good inside game, Arizona must get serious about urban revitalization. And that will require big changes.

In the early 1990s, the criminal justice debate in America was dominated by phrases like “three strikes and you’re out,” “juveniles who commit adult crime should serve adult time,” and “lock ’em up and throw away the key.” In the latter half of the 1990s, however, the dialogue has shifted. Recognizing the enormous social and capital costs associated with locking people up and “throwing away the key,” many – including some of the strongest get-tough-on-crime advocates just a few years ago – have turned to a different concept: prevention.

Many of the influential voices in Greater Phoenix have come to believe in the power of prevention. In late 1996, a diverse coalition of local leadership from the business community, law enforcement, city and county government, academia, and the court system came together to create the Phoenix Violence Prevention Initiative.

It is an oversimplification to describe the new economy as a technology revolution, something that is mostly driven by and affects business. Clearly, new technologies and business practices are central to the concept of a new economy. However, that’s the easy part to understand. The bigger challenge is to grasp—and then develop strategies to take advantage of—how public policies in the new economy can most positively affect people and places. This report is meant to help Arizonans do just that.

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.

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 a rapidly growing desert metropolis such as Phoenix, the question of which water conservation measures and factors actually save water and which do not is an obviously important one. The water-related decisions made today and in the years to come will have lasting impact on the future of this area, including upon its sustainability. Estimates from the City of Phoenix suggest that, in non-SRP-areas, water demand will exceed water supply by the year 2025--absent droughts or intervention.

This report documents and analyzes the results of a multivariate regression analysis designed to estimate the effects on residential, single-family water consumption of a host of factors, particularly water conservation policies.

What do we mean by "shoes waiting to drop?" We mean the trends that are already well under way — but that we can't quite see yet. These trends could overwhelm us if we don't spot them now and aggressively use our knowledge to plot our course for the future. The five "shoes" highlighted in the report are: A Talent Shake Up; Latino Education Dilemma; A Fuzzy Economic Identity; Lost Stewardship; and The Revenue Sieve.