The Five-Year Consolidated Plan provides the framework for implementation of both City and County missions and is designed to guide HUD-funded housing, homeless and community development policies and programs over the five-year period beginning July 1, 2010 and ending June 30, 2014. The plan provides a comprehensive overview of federal, state and local programs in those program areas. It describes needs, resources, goals, strategies, and objectives.

This study is funded by the Arizona Department of Transportation Multimodal Planning Division Planning Assistance for Rural Areas (PARA) program. The purpose of this study was to evaluate pedestrian safety concerns and evaluate pedestrian infrastructure needs on the Gila River Indian Community and recommend a program of multimodal enhancements to address the identified needs.

This study will prepare an updated Tribal Long Range Transportation Plan and a strategic plan for improvements over five-, 10-, and 20-year periods, incorporating both roadway and multimodal needs. Some key focus areas of the Plan are road maintenance and safety programs, as well as improvement plans for bicycle, pedestrian, and transit systems. It also Identifies updates to the Tribal Transportation Inventory and functional classification systems will assist in expanding the level and types of funding available for transportation projects.

Landscaping planted after January 1, 1987 within publicly owned rights-of-way and irrigated with groundwater may be planted only with plants listed on the ADWR Low Water Use/ Drought Tolerant Plant List for the Tucson AMA. The director may waive this requirement under special circumstances. This list can also be used as a resource for residents and businesses that are interested in conserving water. The list provides a wide array of plants to accomplish a variety of low wateruse landscape designs.

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.