Matching Items (17)
Filtering by

Clear all filters

42166-Thumbnail Image.png
ContributorsArizona State Parks Board (Author)
Created2012
Description

The Arizona State Parks Board was created in 1957 as a government agency with the purposes and objectives to include acquiring, preserving and maintaining areas of natural features, scenic beauty, and historic and scientific significance, pleasure recreation, and health of Arizona’s people.

42071-Thumbnail Image.png
ContributorsArizona State Parks Board (Author)
Created2015
Description

The purpose of the Arizona Trails 2015 Plan is to gather information and recommendations to guide Arizona State Parks and other land management agencies in the management of motorized and non­‐motorized trails, and guide the distribution and expenditures of the Off‐Highway Vehicle Recreation Fund and the Federal Recreational Trails Program.

The purpose of the Arizona Trails 2015 Plan is to gather information and recommendations to guide Arizona State Parks and other land management agencies in the management of motorized and non­‐motorized trails, and guide the distribution and expenditures of the Off‐Highway Vehicle Recreation Fund and the Federal Recreational Trails Program. The Arizona Trails Plan is updated every five years.

43113-Thumbnail Image.png
ContributorsArizona State Parks Board (Author)
Created2009-10-20
Description

This planning document details the results of extensive surveys of Arizonans’ thoughts, preferences and priorities regarding trails and off-highway vehicle routes. Throughout the year 2008, staff at Arizona State Parks and faculty at Arizona State University partnered to solicit information from more than 5,500 Arizonans about what types of motorized

This planning document details the results of extensive surveys of Arizonans’ thoughts, preferences and priorities regarding trails and off-highway vehicle routes. Throughout the year 2008, staff at Arizona State Parks and faculty at Arizona State University partnered to solicit information from more than 5,500 Arizonans about what types of motorized or non-motorized trails they use, how often they use trails, what they like or don’t like about trails, and what trail managers should focus their time and dollars on to make the trail experience better.

Created2000 to 2017
Description

This appropriations limit calculation includes a brief history of the appropriations limit, a step-by-step narration of the process used in computing the limit, and the detailed calculation of the appropriations limit. Pursuant to the law, both the Governor’s Office of Strategic Planning and Budgeting and the Joint Legislative Budget Committee

This appropriations limit calculation includes a brief history of the appropriations limit, a step-by-step narration of the process used in computing the limit, and the detailed calculation of the appropriations limit. Pursuant to the law, both the Governor’s Office of Strategic Planning and Budgeting and the Joint Legislative Budget Committee staff are required to provide reports. However the ratio of actual appropriations or estimated appropriations to state personal income is likely to differ due to varying methodologies used by the two budget offices with respect to statutory appropriations. Statutory appropriations are grants of authority enacted by the Legislature and approved by the Governor that are continuous in nature and codified in the statutes. No authority is needed (e.g., in the annual appropriations bill) beyond the original enactment for monies to be expended.

43337-Thumbnail Image.png
ContributorsArizona State Parks Board (Publisher)
Created2009-10-30
Description

The report states that the State Parks system is in imminent danger of complete collapse as a result of financial starvation during most of this decade. A chronic lack of capital funding has led to the devastation of Parks infrastructure. In addition, budget cuts in Fiscal Years 2009 and 2010

The report states that the State Parks system is in imminent danger of complete collapse as a result of financial starvation during most of this decade. A chronic lack of capital funding has led to the devastation of Parks infrastructure. In addition, budget cuts in Fiscal Years 2009 and 2010 so far have forced the closure of several parks and reduced hours at 17 other sites. The Task Force's chief recommendation is that the State should implement a Sustainable State Parks Fund, which would be financed by a $14 to $15 annual contribution to be collected from owners of non-commercial vehicles as a part of the vehicle registration process. The proceeds would be dedicated to the operation, maintenance and capital needs of State Parks. In return, private vehicles bearing Arizona license plates would be admitted free to State Parks.

68364-Thumbnail Image.png
Created1996-07
Description

Between May and July of 1996, members of the council were asked to participate in a series of interviews. The primary purpose of the interviews was to elicit council members' views of and expectations for Arizona's STW initiative. A second reason was to clarify the mission of the council itself.

Between May and July of 1996, members of the council were asked to participate in a series of interviews. The primary purpose of the interviews was to elicit council members' views of and expectations for Arizona's STW initiative. A second reason was to clarify the mission of the council itself. This paper highlights salient points from the interviews. Quotes are used verbatim.

68424-Thumbnail Image.png
ContributorsGammage, Grady Jr. (Author) / Welch, Nancy (Author) / White, Dave (Author) / Arizona State Parks Board (Sponsor) / Morrison Institute for Public Policy (Publisher)
Created2009-10
Description

This report lists the dangers threatening Arizona's 31 state parks, particularly in light of possible state trust land reform, continuing population growth and budget cuts. It also offers possible solutions to the funding crisis, including potential revenue options to provide stable, sustainable funding for Arizona’s state parks.

68528-Thumbnail Image.png
ContributorsVandegrift, Judith A. (Author) / Greene, Andrea (Contributor) / Sandler, Linda (Contributor) / Bierlein, Louann (Contributor) / Dickey, Linda (Contributor) / Morrison Institute for Public Policy (Publisher)
Created1994-09
Description

In preparation for new federal legislation that promotes unprecedented levels of comprehensive planning and service integration at state and local levels, an analysis of state issues relevant to comprehensive service delivery is necessary. This paper examines such state issues, with a focus on Arizona's at-risk population, and presents a framework

In preparation for new federal legislation that promotes unprecedented levels of comprehensive planning and service integration at state and local levels, an analysis of state issues relevant to comprehensive service delivery is necessary. This paper examines such state issues, with a focus on Arizona's at-risk population, and presents a framework for comprehensive service delivery. It provides the rationale for such service delivery, summarizes the literature on research-based practices, illustrates district approaches to comprehensive service delivery, and sets forth guidelines for developing a comprehensive plan. System components of an effective plan are discussed in detail--student education, parent/family involvement, social/economic services, health services, and professional development. Five general principles underlie success: philosophy, people, processes, promising practices, and partners. Recommendations for developing comprehensive service delivery programs include the following: (1) build on existing information; (2) consolidate knowledge; and (3) think long-term. Contains 11 figures and over 250 references. Appendices contain information on Arizona practitioners' views and an illustration of a side-by-side program analysis.

68519-Thumbnail Image.png
ContributorsDickey, Linda (Author) / Vandegrift, Judith A. (Author) / Morrison Institute for Public Policy (Publisher)
Created1998-03
Description

The School-to-Work (STW) Opportunities Act of 1994 promotes the development of statewide systems that support workforce and economic development through changes in the ways that students are educated. Jointly funded by the U.S. Departments of Labor and Education, the Act emphasizes school-based and work-based learning and activities designed to connect

The School-to-Work (STW) Opportunities Act of 1994 promotes the development of statewide systems that support workforce and economic development through changes in the ways that students are educated. Jointly funded by the U.S. Departments of Labor and Education, the Act emphasizes school-based and work-based learning and activities designed to connect the two. In order to fulfill the Act’s work-based learning component, employers are recruited to work with students. Recruitment efforts have generated questions from employers concerning their obligations and legal responsibilities should they become involved in STW programs. This paper attempts to clarify these issues.

68449-Thumbnail Image.png
ContributorsSandler, Linda (Author) / Bierlein, Louann (Contributor) / Vandegrift, Judith A. (Contributor) / Dickey, Linda (Contributor) / Higgens, Karen (Contributor) / Morrison Institute for Public Policy (Publisher)
Created1994-10
Description

During 1993-94, the Morrison Institute for Public Policy at Arizona State University conducted a study on behalf of the Arizona Department of Education. This document presents findings of that study, which examined linkages between health services and schools for a comprehensive service delivery to students. Following the introduction, chapter 1

During 1993-94, the Morrison Institute for Public Policy at Arizona State University conducted a study on behalf of the Arizona Department of Education. This document presents findings of that study, which examined linkages between health services and schools for a comprehensive service delivery to students. Following the introduction, chapter 1 provides a national overview on children's health and the public schools, presenting national and legislative initiatives and a framework for linking health services and schools. Chapter 2 reviews what is known about the major issues in child health in Arizona and its schools, synthesizing health data from several sources.

Survey results from 531 Arizona school principals about school-based/school-linked health and social services are also analyzed. A discussion of the Arizona perspective follows in chapter 3, which examines the philosophy guiding state initiatives, key players, the processes that support school-based/school-linked health services, and a sample of current state activities. The fourth chapter provides a view of how some Arizona schools are attempting to address these issues through the provision of student health services at or near school sites. The last chapter reviews action necessary to facilitate linkages between schools and health services, and the status of Arizona efforts. It concludes with some considerations for the future. A conclusion is that the state is making significant progress toward promoting and, in some schools, implementing such services. Eight tables and seven figures are included.