An update to the Flagstaff Regional Plan 2030 (FRP30), to bring its Road Network Illustration (Map 25) into compliance with Arizona Revised Statute requirements and to resolve inconsistencies between Map 25 and parts of the Flagstaff City Code. This update does not alter the intent of FRP30; it is only concerned with correcting errors, removing legal vulnerability, and improving the readability of FRP30.

The result of an application to the Arizona Department of Transportation Planning Assistance for Rural Areas (PARA) Program to conduct a multimodal transportation study to address transportation issues in the community. The purpose of the study is to identify the most critical multimodal transportation infrastructure and service needs within the Picture Rocks study area and recommend a program of short-range (0-5 years), mid-range (6-10 years), and long-range (11-20 years) improvements.

Transportation excise tax money is statutorily restricted to street and highway purposes or transportation projects. Gila County demonstrated that it spent excise tax monies during calendar years 2009 through 2013 to address traffic safety and congestion issues and deteriorating road conditions. Also, in January 2014, the County completed the Gila County Transportation Study, which identified the most critical future transportation infrastructure needs and recommended projects to address those needs. We also determined that the County spent its excise tax monies solely for street and highway purposes or transportation projects as required by Arizona Revised Statutes §28-6392(B), and implemented all but one of our prior audit recommendations.

A number of significant positive and negative economic impacts could result from Pima County's SDCP and related programs, according to an analysis of existing research on large-scale conservation planning undertaken to provide a framework for community decision-making. This report offers no final verdict on the net economic impact of Pima County's current, ambitious initiatives in habitat conservation and growth management. However, it does provide a framework for future assessment and decision-making.

Though the Great Recession may be officially over, all is not well in Arizona. Three years after the collapse of a massive real estate “bubble,” the deepest economic downturn in memory exposed and exacerbated one of the nation’s most profound state fiscal crises, with disturbing implications for Arizona citizens and the state’s long-term economic health.

This brief takes a careful look at the Grand Canyon State’s fiscal situation, examining both Arizona’s serious cyclical budget shortfall—the one resulting from a temporary collapse of revenue due to the recession—as well as the chronic, longer-term, and massive structural imbalances that have developed largely due to policy choices made in better times. This primer employs a unique methodology to estimate the size of the state’s structural deficit and then explores the mix of forces, including the large permanent tax reductions, that created them. It also highlights some of the dramatic impacts these fiscal challenges are having on service-delivery as well as on local governments. The brief suggests some of the steps state policymakers must take to close their budget gaps over the short and longer term. First, it urges better policymaking, and prods leaders to broaden, balance, and diversify the state’s revenue base while looking to assure a long-haul balance of taxing and spending. And second, it recommends that Arizona improve the information-sharing and budgeting processes through which fiscal problems are understood—so they may ultimately be averted.

A series of 51 individual “stakeholder” interviews and two focus groups conducted with members of the Pima County business community in fall, 2001, documented significantly divided opinion about the likely economic impacts of the county’s Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan (SDCP). The results of the stakeholder inquiries were striking. Only one major finding reflected consensus, while several others revealed sharp differences of opinion in the business community about the potential economic impacts of the SDCP and associated initiatives.