Filtering by
- All Subjects: Historic preservation
- All Subjects: Referendum
- Creators: Pima County (Ariz.). County Administrator's Office
- Creators: Morrison Institute for Public Policy
- Status: Published
The purpose of this report is to highlight lands acquired with 1997 and 2004 voter-approved bond funds, provide a historical record of Pima County’s land conservation efforts and consider how these properties contribute to Pima County’s long-term vision – the Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan. The report also provides a special feature on the evolution of conservation and land use planning in Pima County.
This report was drafted to facilitate discussion about protection of cultural resources under the Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan. The first part of the report provides an overview of historic preservation in Pima County, while the second part provides analysis and recommendations for improving Pima County's historic preservation policy.
Provides a brief analysis of the legal and financial feasibility of the March 16, 2000 proposal, as well as a comparative analysis of (1) the conservation value, (2) the level of cultural resource protection, and (3) the fiscal impact of the proposal as measured against other development projects and against the various alternatives that might be exercised by the landowner.
Pima County is blessed with a rich and varying record of human settlement over the 11,000 years representing prehistoric, Spanish Colonial, and Mexican-American influences in our history. The County's archaeological site is the building of structure with traditional cultural values and historic landscapes are all nonrenewable cultural resources.
Report takes a look at the pros and cons of three propositions that will be on the November 2014 ballot.
* Prop 122: a constitutional amendment to allow the Legislature to ignore any federal law or action they think is unconstitutional.
* Prop 304: would increase legislator's salaries to $35,000/year.
* Prop 303: would permit a manufacturer to give or sell investigational drugs, biological products, and medical devices to terminally ill patients even though the FDA has not cleared them for general use.
The author writes about Arizona's longstanding belief in direct democracy via referendum, initiative and recall. The Legislature continues to grapple with election reform and strike a balance of how much binding authority should remain in the hands of voters in terms of initiative, referendum and recall, but Arizona’s penchant for people power has been demonstrated since before statehood. In the midst of his campaign for Congress in 1911, for example, Arizona’s Carl Hayden noted that everywhere he went he found voters eager to take control. "The people want their own kind of government,” Hayden told reporters. “They want to be the dictators.”
Since statehood in 1912, Arizona has been among the nation’s leaders in using the initiative process to either adopt a statute or amend the state constitution by placing a measure on the ballot. But such efforts are anything but easy. In fact, organizers have found it to be an expensive, time-consuming and exhausting process – and one that is unlikely to end successfully.