This plan responds to key trends, emerging issues, and community visions and goals. The Plan includes strategies and actions for the years 2020 and 2040 to address identified transportation needs, while being sensitive to possible future funding constraints. This Final Report provides an overview of both the study effort and the work products developed throughout the planning process, which forms the basis for the final plan recommendations. The planning process analyzed the existing transportation system, land use and socioeconomic conditions within the study area; conducted in-depth local stakeholder interviews; developed future growth projections; provided opportunities for public input; and included an evaluation of alternative future solutions.

In 2011, Drachman Institute contracted with the Arizona Department of Housing to develop a public education project about sustainable communities and transit-oriented development along the Metro Light Rail in Phoenix, Tempe, and Mesa, Arizona. The resulting reports present neighborhood analyses and transit-oriented development issues for eight light rail stations selected by the Arizona Department of Housing and the Sustainable Communities Working Group, providing base information on the square half mile area surrounding these sites.

At a “micro” level, the study developed information and provided recommendations to assist each of the paratransit programs in the region to operate services in the most efficient and effective manner possible. At the “macro” level, the study considered alternative regional service designs and developed a regional service plan for the area that would improve mobility for people with disabilities and satisfy the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act.

With the agency integration of Valley Metro and Valley Metro Rail, the budgets for each agency are developed with a unified staffing plan but are maintained as two separate financial entities, with fund and project accounting to segregate revenues and expenses. Each Operating and Capital Budget has been prepared with the goal of delivering a fiscally prudent, balanced budget. FY 2006/2007 was the first full year of Proposition 400 Public Transportation Fund revenues; FY 2005/2006 reflected only five months of PTF revenues.

The Arizona Department of Transportation, the Arizona Game & Fish Department and the Arizona State Parks Board are required to conduct a study every three years on watercraft fuel consumption and recreational watercraft usage. The fuel consumption data is collected to determine the allocation of motor vehicle fuel tax to the State Lake Improvement Fund. The information on recreational watercraft usage patterns on Arizona’s lakes and rivers is necessary, in part, to determine the distribution of SLIF funds to applicants.

This Land Use Survey, conducted for the Cochise County Planning Department, was designed to elicit citizen opinions about the future pattern of growth in Cochise County and land use issues in areas outside of City limits. This project is an initial step in the County’s "Envision 2020: Land Use Planning in Cochise County" process, developed to measure citizen opinions on how growth is currently managed in the County and how to manage future growth.

In fiscal year 2012, St. David Unified School District’s student achievement was much higher than peer districts’, on average, and the District was reasonably efficient in most operational areas. The District’s administrative costs were much lower than peer districts’, but the District lacked sufficient accounting and computer controls. The District’s plant operations and transportation program were reasonably efficient overall. However, the District needs to accurately determine and report to the Arizona Department of Education its bus ridership information to help ensure the District is properly funded and to allow it the ability to calculate and monitor rider-based transportation performance measures. The District’s food service program was inefficient, with a cost per meal that was much higher than the peer districts’ average primarily because of overstaffing and inefficient purchasing practices. As a result, the District spent $44,110 of its Maintenance and Operation Fund monies to subsidize the program.