The Arizona notary law was amended in 1996, 1997, 1999, 2000, and 2004. The 1996 amendments comprised the first major revisions of the notary law in Arizona in more than 50 years. Rules, effective August 25, 2004, are included in this manual which contains:

* A question and answer section
* Notary laws
* Rules
* Instructions for completing a notary application form
* An application form
* Name/Address form
* An index

This publication contains lobbying definitions, statutes, and lobbyist forms for those interested in how to register as a lobbyist and file with our office. This booklet helps explain how to register and file lobbyist reports with the Election Services Division. Included are deadlines, instructions and reporting requirements – all at your fingertips for quick reference.

The Secretary of State’s Office publishes this manual as a guide for Arizona notaries. Revisions to this manual include concise explanations of how to apply with our office, how to purchase a notary bond, information about your commission, duties as a public official, samples of notarial acts, and the laws and rules that govern Arizona notaries. Arizona notaries are required to have a copy of this manual and keep it as a reference.

This handbook is chiefly intended to help political committees at the state level to understand and comply with the laws of the state relating to campaign finance reporting and to provide some technical assistance and practical guidance on how to use the Secretary of State's campaign finance software to facilitate such reporting. Much of this handbook may be useful to political committees in other Arizona jurisdictions as well.

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.

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.

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.