Matching Items (68)
Filtering by

Clear all filters

41819-Thumbnail Image.png
ContributorsHoffman, Dennis (Author) / Rex, Tom (Author)
Created2009-02
Description

The state government general fund shortfall in the next fiscal year is projected to be $2.4 billion. A projected shortfall of $1.6 billion will need to be closed through spending reductions and/or revenue enhancements. The Legislature has focused on reductions in funding to state agencies. However demand does not decline

The state government general fund shortfall in the next fiscal year is projected to be $2.4 billion. A projected shortfall of $1.6 billion will need to be closed through spending reductions and/or revenue enhancements. The Legislature has focused on reductions in funding to state agencies. However demand does not decline for most public-sector services during a recession. Spending reductions by governments during recessions also worsen economic conditions. State spending cuts would worsen and lengthen the economic recession. The negative economic effects from a personal tax increase would be less than those of a governmental spending decrease. The demand for university services also does not drop during recessions. Any reduction in funding for universities will have a negative and direct effect. A substantial decrease in state government funding for universities will have negative consequences beyond these short-term effects. Any action--such as budget cuts--that undermines the success of the state's universities also impairs the state's economy.

41823-Thumbnail Image.png
ContributorsHoffman, Dennis (Author) / Clark, Tracy (Author)
Created2007
Description

Various measures of Arizona state government expenditures suggest that state spending has increased substantially, both in recent years and during a longer period stretching back to 1990. However, increases are much more modest after adjusting for inflation and the state's rapid population growth. Further, the spending increases generally have been

Various measures of Arizona state government expenditures suggest that state spending has increased substantially, both in recent years and during a longer period stretching back to 1990. However, increases are much more modest after adjusting for inflation and the state's rapid population growth. Further, the spending increases generally have been in line with the gains in various measures of income.

41825-Thumbnail Image.png
Created2007-03
Description

Students FIRST (Fair and Immediate Resources for Students Today) was enacted July 9, 1998. This paper will focus on (1) the facts and direct rationale behind the payment for K-12 school construction from a pool of current general fund dollars, as mandated in the Students FIRST provisions; and (2) the

Students FIRST (Fair and Immediate Resources for Students Today) was enacted July 9, 1998. This paper will focus on (1) the facts and direct rationale behind the payment for K-12 school construction from a pool of current general fund dollars, as mandated in the Students FIRST provisions; and (2) the implications and logical consequences of bonding versus paying for capital improvements with cash on an annual basis. 'Track 1' designates the status quo strategy of cash payment for capital improvements, while 'Track 2' represents a strategy for bonding that distributes the costs of the projects to taxpayers over the course of their useful life.

41827-Thumbnail Image.png
ContributorsHill, John K. (Author) / Hoffman, Dennis L. (Author) / Rex, Tom R. (Author)
Created2008
Description

The state government general fund shortfall in the current fiscal year is projected to be between about $550 million and $1 billion. This shortfall will need to be eliminated through spending cuts and/or revenue enhancements. The Legislature has demonstrated a preference for spending cuts. However demand does not decline during

The state government general fund shortfall in the current fiscal year is projected to be between about $550 million and $1 billion. This shortfall will need to be eliminated through spending cuts and/or revenue enhancements. The Legislature has demonstrated a preference for spending cuts. However demand does not decline during a recession for most public-sector services, including university services. Any reduction in funding for universities will have a negative and direct effect. A reduction in state government spending for universities of around $200 million would cause direct and indirect job losses of approximately 4,000. A substantial decrease in state government funding for universities will have negative consequences beyond these short-term effects.

42043-Thumbnail Image.png
ContributorsHoffman, Dennis L. (Author) / Rex, Tom R. (Author) / The Pride Publishing Company (Publisher)
Created2009-01
Description

An examination of public funding for elementary and secondary education and higher education in Arizona from historical and interstate perspectives, in light of the funding mandate expressed in the Arizona Constitution. An evaluation of public education in Arizona is included.

42044-Thumbnail Image.png
ContributorsHoffman, Dennis L. (Author) / Rex, Tom R. (Author) / The Pride Publishing Company (Publisher)
Created2009-03
Description

This is a summary of several reports related to government finance in Arizona that have been produced by the Office of the University Economist since December 2008. Some new information has been added in an attempt to provide a complete picture. The format of this report is a brief summary

This is a summary of several reports related to government finance in Arizona that have been produced by the Office of the University Economist since December 2008. Some new information has been added in an attempt to provide a complete picture. The format of this report is a brief summary by issue, sometimes accompanied by a table or chart. References are provided to the report and the page number where additional detail can be found.

42045-Thumbnail Image.png
ContributorsHoffman, Dennis L. (Author) / Rex, Tom R. (Author) / The Pride Publishing Company (Publisher)
Created2011-10
Description

Following an analysis of economic conditions, this paper examines actions that can be taken by state governments to stimulate the economy. The only action that results in a significant near-term effect is to accelerate spending on physical infrastructure that has already been identified as needed.

42047-Thumbnail Image.png
ContributorsRex, Tom R. (Author) / The Pride Publishing Company (Publisher)
Created2013-01
Description

Reviews population projections released in December 2012 by the U.S. Census Bureau and by the Arizona Department of Administration's Office of Employment and Population Statistics. Compares the new projections to previously released projections.