This Citizens Clean Elections Commission Nonparticipating Candidate Guide was created to provide information to candidates interested in running for legislative or statewide office. Participating candidates for statewide offices and legislative offices are eligible to participate in the public funding program. The system is voluntary; candidates may choose to participate in the system or they may choose to raise funds in the traditional manner. Candidates who choose to raise funds with private campaign contributions are referred to as “nonparticipating candidates.”

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 Citizens Clean Elections Commission was established by the enactment of the Citizens Clean Elections Act. The Commission’s mission is to fairly, faithfully and fully implement and administer the Citizens Clean Elections Act. All members must be registered to vote in the State of Arizona. No more than two members of the commission may be members of the same political party. No more than two members of the commission may be residents of the same county.

A participating candidate is an individual who has decided to run for a statewide office or the Legislature, agrees not to accept special interest monies and adheres to the Citizens Clean Elections Act and commission rules. In return, the participating candidate will receive funding from the Citizens Clean Elections Fund. In order for a candidate to receive funding, the participating candidate must collect a specified number of $5 Qualifying Contributions from registered voters within his or her district for a legislative candidate or registered voters in Arizona for a statewide candidate.

The Rodeo-Chediski Fire Complex began as a small blaze in a remote region of east-central Arizona and within days erupted into the largest wildfire in Arizona history. Fortunately, no lives were lost. However, from June 18, 2002 to the time of its containment on July 7, 2002, the Rodeo-Chediski fire destroyed over 490 structures and 467,000 acres of ponderosa pine and pinyon-juniper woodland—an estimated 500 million to 1.3 billion board feet of timber. Jurisdictions involved included the Fort Apache Indian Reservation, the Apache-Sitgreaves National Forest, the Tonto National Forest, and private lands adjacent to Highway 260, from the Town of Forest Lakes east to the City of Show Low. Virtually all of the acres burned were in Navajo County, with some damage in the contiguous counties of Coconino, Apache, and Gila Counties. This health assessment describes the fire events and summarizes the resulting public health impacts from the fire.

The Arizona Department of Health Services completed this health consultation at the request of the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality. This consult evaluates whether soil vapors from volatile organic compounds in the subsurface near the Silver Creek Subdivision in Tucson, Arizona are present at levels that may cause adverse health effects.

The purpose of this health consultation is to evaluate the air monitoring conducted by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality at Mary McLeod Bethune School (Phoenix, AZ) and evaluate the potential impact on public health. The air monitoring data includes particulate matter and metals. The ADEQ’s primary objective of this air sampling is to provide an understanding of the hazardous air pollutants in the Phoenix area.

The Blue Ridge Elementary School began receiving complaints from parents and staff in 1996. The primary complaints were related to air quality problems associated with renovation activities. The school responded to these complaints by hiring a consultant to evaluate the environmental conditions at the school. The school received a report in 1997 containing several recommendations that the school implemented in 1997. A group of parents continued to express concerns about environmental conditions at the school. This group suggested that environmental exposures might be causing some students to be absent from school. In response to these complaints, the school hired another environmental consultant to conduct a follow up environmental assessment in December 2002. This report summarizes and evaluates the environmental data collected for the school and examines school attendance rates to determine whether students are absent more than at similar schools and if so, whether environmental conditions could be a contributing factor.

This health consultation evaluates results of irrigation well samples collected by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality in October 2003. Previous results obtained by the Blue Ridge Elementary School District in the summer of 2003 indicated trichloroethylene levels above the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Maximum Contaminant Level. In addition, the most recent (2002) Annual Water Quality Report from the drinking water supplier, Arizona Water Company, was reviewed. A previous health consultation (Blue Ridge Elementary School, Lakeside, Navajo County, Arizona Health Consultation-April 30, 2003) reviewed environmental conditions at Blue Ridge Elementary School. Parents and school staff were concerned that environmental exposures were causing students to be absent from school. Drinking water quality reports, indoor air quality data, food safety, environmental sanitation records, student attendance rates, and the results of an annual parent satisfaction survey were evaluated in the consultation. Arizona Department of Health Services concluded that environmental conditions at Blue Ridge Elementary School posed no apparent public health hazard, and that attendance rates were similar to statewide attendance rates. As part of the 2003 health consultation, ADHS requested that the school district conduct water sampling from the on-site irrigation water wells for the school grounds. Those sampling results were not available when the 2003 health consultation was completed.