Letter from Joseph J. Cotter to Carl Hayden detailing the approximate amount of patented land within the proposed borders of the national park. Thomas J. Croaff is mentioned in his belief that he owns half the land in the proposed area; however, Joseph J. Cotter disputes this claim. Ralph Cameron's mining interests in the park are also mentioned. Circa 1917.

Raising Arizona was the challenge of the 20th century. Sustaining Arizona is now the challenge of the 21st. A crucial part of that task is not just understanding today’s knowledge economy, but mastering it.
If the state makes this fundamental transition, the brief history of Arizona’s future will read simply: They succeeded in the second stage. Human capital took its rightful place as a chief component of competitiveness. As a result, the story will go, Arizona moved into the top ranks of economic leadership after years in the second tier. Equity and prosperity resulted too. Most important, the state was ready for the next stage of competition. This happy ending for Arizona, of course, has been envisioned repeatedly over time. And in fact, a variety of human capital policies and programs to achieve it are in place. However, many would say that human capital is an area of unfinished business for Arizona. The Arizona Minority Education Policy Analysis Center (AMEPAC) developed "To Learn and Earn" to highlight the issues and asked Morrison Institute for Public Policy at Arizona State University to support the effort with research and analysis. In turn, AMEPAC will present the issues to Arizona stakeholders for their feedback. This process will kick off a multi-partner series of policy action projects. The first results will be presented in November 2009 at the next human capital conference presented by the Arizona Commission for Postsecondary Education.

This research study clearly articulates the critical need for industry to work in conjunction with educators in order to develop an emphasis on STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math) in our schools systems. This partnership is essential for creating a competitive global workforce in Arizona. Aggressive action must be taken now, to fuel the growth of our economy with a properly educated workforce that will improve our standard of living. Changing our culture to celebrate innovation requires a comprehensive plan and collaboration between business, academia and our government. We have an obligation to our children and our country to support this initiative with our time, funds and energy.

In February of 1998, the Pima County Board of Supervisors launched what has evolved into the Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan (SDCP) -- a comprehensive effort to protect the Sonoran Desert, guide growth and rationalize land development in the metropolitan Tucson region. Proponents of this planning process maintained that the project would reconcile conflicts between human activities and conservation, providing benefits for both wildlife and economic development. Critics, however, have increasingly alleged that implementing such an initiative will adversely affect land and housing markets, increase taxes and create problems of housing affordability. Over time a pressing need has consequently grown for objective information about the possible fiscal and economic impacts of the conservation programs being assembled by Pima County. This report addresses that need. It is a tool in the form of an impartial framework for assessment that government officials, environmentalists, business people and the general public can use for debate and decision-making.

A series of 51 individual “stakeholder” interviews and two focus groups conducted with members of the Pima County business community in fall, 2001, documented significantly divided opinion about the likely economic impacts of the county’s Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan (SDCP). The results of the stakeholder inquiries were striking. Only one major finding reflected consensus, while several others revealed sharp differences of opinion in the business community about the potential economic impacts of the SDCP and associated initiatives.

This report presents the second comprehensive look at the conditions of children and families in Arizona. Building upon information presented in the 1992 Factbook, this document presents and analyzes 48 indicators of child well-being. Following the executive summary and tables, chapter 1 provides an overview of the data for the state as a whole, including a summary of key findings and tables depicting raw numbers, rates adjusted for population growth, and rate changes over time. Racial and ethnic breakdowns are presented when such data are available.

Chapters 2-16 offer individual county profiles, following the general format established in the state chapter. These chapters offer insights into regional variations and identify varying conditions for children across the state. The report charts data within the state and county chapters for each of the following six categories: (1) poverty; (2) child health and safety; (3) child abuse, neglect, and out-of-home care; (4) early care and education; (5) children in school; and (6) teens at-risk. Overall, findings reveal significant improvements for a few indicators since 1990, most notably within birth-related items, such as an increase in the percent of women receiving timely prenatal care and a decrease in low birth-weight births. Findings also suggest there has been a worsening for many indicators, including poverty, firearm-related deaths and hospitalizations, alleged child abuse incidents, and births to teens.