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.

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 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

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.

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.

This report brings together the results of a survey of 1100 homeless people living in and around downtown Phoenix in 1996 with the results of a similar survey conducted in 1983. In addition to providing a snapshot of the homeless population in Phoenix, the data and comparative information presented in this report also reveal the complex and intractable nature of the homeless problem in general.