Filtering by
- All Subjects: Education
- All Subjects: Politics and government
- All Subjects: Housing
- Creators: Zah, Peterson
- Creators: Rex, Tom R.
The age of housing in the Phoenix metropolitan area reflects the mostly steady outward spread of development. Large differences exist across the area in other housing measures. Many of these differences are closely related to geographic variations in household income and in the type of housing. As in the rest of the country, housing affordability in the Phoenix metropolitan area fell substantially in the 1970s. During the 1980s, the change in affordability varied by situation. Affordability rose for the median-income household, especially for homeownership. For those at the low end of the income spectrum, affordability of rental units improved slightly, but affordability of owned units worsened. Data for the 1990s are limited; the affordability of owned units rose for the median-income household, which could afford the median-priced home in 1998. An inadequate supply of very low-cost housing existed in the Phoenix metropolitan area in 1990. Even if low-income households were perfectly matched to low-income housing that they could afford, a little less than 3 percent of all households (about 23,000) could not have found affordable housing. The inadequacy expanded in the 1980s. The percentage of households reporting an unaffordable housing payment was much greater. Considering only low-income households who spent more than 30 percent of their income on housing, about 21 percent of all households had a housing problem related to affordability.
The condition of Arizona’s infrastructure has a direct impact on economic productivity and quality of life. As economic competition expands domestically and globally, and as the knowledge economy evolves, the importance of a strong infrastructure increases. Education, in particular, is of growing importance. Arizona’s infrastructure challenges will require commitment and creativity to meet the needs and potential of 10 million people and to ensure a positive future for the state.
A landmark assessment of infrastructure needs in Arizona was produced by the L. William Seidman Research Institute in May 2008 for the Arizona Investment Council (AIC): "Infrastructure Needs and Funding Alternatives for Arizona: 2008-2032", that addressed infrastructure needs in four categories: energy, telecommunications, transportation, and water and wastewater. The information from the AIC report is a major input to the report that follows. Other types of infrastructure — most notably education, health care, and public safety — also are analyzed here to provide a more complete picture of infrastructure needs in Arizona. The goals of this report are to place Arizona’s infrastructure needs into national and historical contexts, to identify the changing conditions in infrastructure provision that make building Arizona’s infrastructure in the future a more problematic proposition than in the past, and to provide projections of the possible costs of providing infrastructure in Arizona over the next quarter century.
In this interview, Zah and Iverson discuss various political, economic, and controversial topics. Zah gives his impressions and thoughts about the Hopi government, including the struggle in trying to find the balance between traditional and progressive ideals. Zah also reflects on his positive relationship with Hopi chairman Ivan Sidney. The changes in Navajo politics, the Tribal Council, and chapter relationships are addressed, especially the 2010 vote for the reduction of the number of Council delegates from 88 to 24. Zah gives his overall assessment of the role of casino gaming in the Navajo economy. He goes into detail about the main issues that concerned and delayed the Navajo Nation in creating casinos. Zah lastly focuses on the Indian Civil Rights Act and the controversial confrontation that took place between Annie Wauneka and Ted Mitchell, which ultimately changed the ongoing leadership of DNA People’s Legal Services.
In this interview, Iverson and Zah dialog on the topics of leadership and the evolution of the Navajo Nation. Zah gives his perspective on leadership and the important attributes that a Navajo leader should have in order to be effective. Iverson and Zah discuss past and present influential leaders that have made an impact on the Navajo Nation. Those who were mentioned include the inspirational Chief Manuelito, health issues activist Annie Wauneka, livestock advocate Tom Dodge, and William Morgan, who was a pioneer for the written Navajo language. Zah comments on the leadership role of DNA People's Legal Services and his experience as a leader there. Zah expresses his ideals about individual rights and education and how the hard work of his colleagues and himself has furthered those ideals. Iverson and Zah converse about education and the growing presence of American Indians at Arizona State University. Finally, Zah gives his thoughts about two major challenges that the Navajo Nation face today: trying to keep the Navajo government accountable to the Navajo people and the effective management of resources on the Navajo Nation.
Peterson Zah shares his own perceptions about the Navajo history, issues, and resolutions with the Hopi Nation. He also gives his views on the Navajo-Hopi land dispute and the issues of the government relocation program. During his chairmanship in 1983, Zah worked with Hopi chairman Ivan Sidney to create a cooperative environment that would benefit both nations. Zah focuses on the positive effects of cooperative leadership in terms of Navajo history and in his experiences with Ivan Sidney. He gives examples of his successful experiences cooperating with Ivan Sidney, including remedying the uranium trailing situation in Tuba City, creating the Turquoise Trail, and opening Hopi High School. Zah briefly touches on Navajo history, especially the beginning of the Navajo reservation. A large portion of this interview also focuses on Navajo traditional religion, the freedom of religion, and the Native American Church movement that took place in the late 1930s to the 1950s. Zah also discusses key individuals in the history of Navajo religion such as David S. Clark, who was the president of the Native American Church, and Raymond Nakai, who was responsible for educating people about the freedom of religion.
In this interview, Peterson Zah addresses Navajo history, both past and present. Numerous topics are discussed in this interview such as the beginning stages of the Navajo reservation, language and culture, women in Navajo politics, and old and new Navajo values. Zah commentates on matters pertaining to the Navajo Tribal Government, such as the Indian Reorganization Act, the history and issues of the Navajo Tribal Government, and its future. He mentions key individuals in Navajo history that contributed to the growth and well-being of the community, for example Annie Wauneka and Raymond Nakai. Zah also reflects on some of his greatest achievements while working at DNA People's Legal Services and as Tribal Chairman. Major achievements mentioned include the revamping of Apache County, the rising number of Navajo lawyers, and the creation of new high schools on the Navajo reservation, which ultimately led to the closing down of boarding schools. Zah gives details about significant precedent-setting cases that DNA People's Legal Services handled, such as the McClanahan v. the Arizona Tax Commission case.
In this interview, Peterson Zah reveals personal experiences about his childhood, the struggles of growing up, and how those experiences shaped his life today. Zah reflects on living close to Keams Canyon, trying to keep family traditions, farming, obtaining water, and the hardships of family going to war, scarcity of food and water, and having to relocate multiple times due to the Navajo-Hopi Land Dispute. He recounts his personal experiences attending Tuba City Boarding School, Phoenix Indian School, Phoenix College, and finally Arizona State University. Zah recalls various aspects of his education including his class schedules and routine at Tuba City Boarding School and the goal of Phoenix Indian School being more concerned about vocational training than college preparation. He also takes a moment to address his mentors that helped him throughout the different stages of his education.
In this interview, Peterson Zah discusses the important legal impact that the DNA People’s Legal Services program had on the Navajo Nation. He gives details from its conception in 1967, to how the program was named, its goals, and the controversies surrounding it. Zah recounts his experiences working in the DNA People’s Legal Services, especially his hand in the construction of the office buildings, recruiting new lawyers, and getting Navajo students excited about pursuing a career in law. The second half of the interview focuses mostly on a few influential, political individuals that gave the Navajo legal council or ran for tribal chairmanship. Zah and Iverson both give insight and historical details about Norman Littell, John Boyden, Raymond Nakai, and Peter MacDonald.
In this interview, Peterson Zah expresses his opinions and observations about education during his time at Window Rock High School as a teacher and as a member of the Board of Trustees. He discusses issues concerning boarding schools, bringing public schools onto the Navajo reservation, and creating an efficient educational policy. Zah speaks about the Indian Self Determination Act of 1975, the establishment of the Navajo Community College, and how acquiring the rights to vote allowed the Navajo Nation to play a more pivotal role in elections and educational decisions. The latter half of the interview reflects upon the growing number of Native American students in higher education, retention rates, self-determination, and community pride and support. Zah also addresses the Native American achievement program created by ASU to help with retention rates and the future goals for Native American students in higher education.