This document is intended to give an overview of the Federal-Aid Program and its impacts on Arizona. There are four major sections in the report: (1) Overview of the Federal-Aid Program; (2) Arizona Federal funding highlights for the fiscal year; (3) Federal-aid Highway Program Characteristics; and (4) Federal-Aid Highway Program descriptions. The first section gives a general overview of how the Federal-Aid Program is financed, the authorization process and a discussion of the apportionment, allocation and obligation authority processes. The second section deals with Arizona Federal funding highlights the for fiscal year. The last two sections are devoted to characteristics of the core programs, including eligibility, limitations, apportionment formulas and descriptions of the funding categories.

Since 1986, the Arizona Department of Transportation has used a comprehensive regression-based econometric model to estimate Transportation Excise Tax revenues for Maricopa County. These revenues, which flow into the Regional Area Road Fund (RARF), are the major funding source for the Maricopa County Freeway Program. This document contains the official forecast of expected values for the Maricopa County Transportation Excise Tax as developed by the Arizona Department of Transportation in cooperation with the Maricopa Association of Governments, Valley Metro and Valley Metro Rail.

The Maricopa County Transportation Excise Tax, often referred to as the “1/2 cent sales tax” is levied upon business activities in Maricopa County, including retail sales, contracting, utilities, rental of real and personal property, restaurant and bar receipts, and other activities. Transportation excise tax revenues are deposited in the Maricopa County Regional Area Road Fund (RARF) which is administered by the Arizona Department of Transportation. These revenues were the principal source of funding for the Regional Freeway System in Maricopa County and were dedicated by statute to the purchase of right-of-way, design and construction of new freeways, widening of existing freeways and highways, improvements to the arterial street system, regional bus service and high capacity transit services such as light rail.

The State of Arizona taxes motor fuels and collects a variety of fees relating to the registration and operation of motor vehicles in the state. These collections include gasoline and use fuel taxes, motor carrier fees, vehicle license taxes, motor vehicle registration fees, and other miscellaneous fees. These revenues are deposited in the Arizona Highway User Revenue Fund and are then distributed to the cities, towns and counties of the State and to the State Highway Fund, which is administered by the Department. These taxes and fees represent a source of revenues available to the state for highway related expenses.

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.

The fourth, and final, annual statewide public opinion polling is part of a multifaceted evaluation of Arizona's school to work (STW) initiative. Baseline data were established in spring 1996; comparative data have been collected annually since then. The polling assesses public attitudes toward STW, and determines their level of support or opposition to the initiative. Each year, three constituent groups were polled: parents, businesses, and educators. Sample sizes in 1999 yielded results comparable with those in 1996, 1997, and 1998 results. Findings indicate the following: public awareness of STW has grown significantly during the past 4 years; awareness of involvement in a regional partnership has grown; most Arizonans are satisfied with the overall quality of public schools, but are least satisfied with those aspects of education that relate more closely to STW, and are in favor of changes in public schools that support STW outcomes; and many Arizonans are skeptical that STW "can work." Clear majorities of Arizonans support STW on every indicator of support measured, including the following: willingness to pay taxes to support STW; willingness to vote for pro-STW elected officials; identification of STW participation as "very important" in the lives of students; indication that one would change schools to allow a child to participate in STW; and support to include STW in the state's budget.