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.

Dark money. The name itself carries ominous undertones, undertones that critics of this relatively new campaign-finance phenomenon claim reflect a genuine threat to democracy. Its defenders, on the other hand, argue that the dark money approach to funding political campaigns is merely an extension of Americans’ basic right to free speech. In other words, the issues at hand could hardly be more profound.

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.”

Throughout Arizona and the Southwest, the odds are against high achievement in schools with a mostly Latino, mostly poor student enrollment. Some schools, however, "beat the odds" and achieve consistently high results or show steady gains. Why do these schools succeed where others fail? Using the methodology of business guru Jim Collins from his book "Good to Great: Why Some Companies Make the Leap...and Others Don't," the authors of this report found 12 elementary and middle schools in Arizona--schools whose students are mostly Latino and mostly poor--that are "beating the odds" on reading and math scores. The authors compared them with similar schools that are performing poorly. The comparisons yielded many insights that are contrary to conventional wisdom. One key result is the unearthing of six elements of success that can translate into broader messages for education policy and strategy. The report recommends the creation of leadership programs for principals and teachers and calls for the creation of a dissemination mechanism to bring "best practices" into every school in Arizona.

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.

State trust lands are among the greatest public assets in Arizona’s portfolio. Set aside at statehood, the Arizona State Land Department manages more than 9 million acres of trust lands on behalf of 14 beneficiaries. The largest of which by far is Arizona Public Education K through 12.The mission of the Land Department is to maximize revenues from these trust lands. In FY 2005, state trust lands generated $115 million for all beneficiaries, of which $101 million was designated to support public K-12 schools.These amounts are increasing rapidly as more state trust land becomes attractive for development in Arizona’s urban areas.

The parcel discussed in this report, “Superstition Vistas,” stands out as the jewel among Arizona’s trust lands. Not only is it situated in the path of metro Phoenix growth, but it also borders thousands of acres of public land managed by the Tonto National Forest and U.S. Bureau of Land Management. Estimates of its total value run well into the billions of dollars.

"The Treasure of the Superstitions" sets the stage for a continuing dialogue about the potential for Superstition Vistas, and indeed, all of Arizona’s trust lands. We look forward to listening to and working with our beneficiaries, citizens, counties, municipalities, real estate businesses, and other interested parties to make the most of Arizona’s “treasure.”

Digital technology is everywhere, revolutionizing how we live, work and play. Yet, as a tool for educating our children, it is conspicuously absent in K-12 classrooms. Textbooks and lectures are still the norm, making the classroom one of the last frontiers of digital technology. This report seeks to answer some of the key questions about digital learning. What is digital learning? Where are we as a country and, in particular, in Arizona, with digital learning? What opportunities does digital learning present? And how can we make the best use of it to help educate our children?

As you will read in this report, digital learning is not a panacea. At its best, digital technology can be a tool to support students and teachers in the learning process. We don’t yet have all the answers. There are plenty of instances we can point to where digital learning efforts may have had disappointing results. Having said that, we believe that digital learning holds great promise in the field of education. It is where digital technology may achieve its greatest possible benefits and impact.

This paper, drawing upon historical data and information from surveys and interviews with more than 50 legislators, lobbyists, and knowledgeable observers, finds that the term limits reform adopted by the Arizona voters in 1992 has caused legislators to make some painful adjustments. Because of term limits many legislators have decided to run for another office prior to the expiration of their terms. This has often meant trying to move from the one legislative house to another, most commonly from the House to the Senate. On the plus side, the report finds that term limits have encouraged greater competition for legislative and other seats and have given voters a greater choice among candidates. To some extent, limits have been a force toward a more inclusive governing process. At the same time, they have generally reduced the power of legislative leaders and generally increased the influence of lobbyists and staff, though not all lobbyists and staff have gained equally. Recent newcomers to the Arizona Legislature are probably not any less knowledgeable than previous classes of newcomers, but under term limits there are more newcomers and members have less time to learn their jobs. For many, the limit to four two-year terms (eight years total) provides too little time to learn how to do the job and do it well.

As cities seek ways to address emerging urban problems, a growing ractice is to combine the efforts of citizens, local government, and community organizations to revitalize and build strong neighborhoods. The Neighborhood Fight Back Program, administered through the City of Phoenix Neighborhood Services Department (NSD), is viewed as one such practice. The Fight Back program offers designated neighborhoods “specialized support over a limited period of time to assist with resident driven neighborhood improvement efforts. These efforts generally focus on revitalization, sustainability, crime and blight reduction, resident participation, neighborhood leadership, development and community building.” At the request of NSD, an external evaluation of the Fight Back program was conducted by the Morrison Institute for Public Policy, School of Public Affairs, Arizona State University. The evaluation involved more than 100 interviews with residents and city staff and an extensive review and analysis of program documentation.

Because of the urgency of workforce issues and the desire to begin a statewide discussion about workforce goals and choices, the Governor’s Council on Workforce Policy wanted to understand if, and how, program governance and organization are hampering progress and what changes might be beneficial. The council asked Morrison Institute for Public Policy (School of Public Affairs, College of Public Programs, Arizona State University) to: (1) Explore the strengths and weaknesses of the organization of Arizona’s workforce system, particularly at the state level (2) Review how other states have revamped their systems and connected workforce and economic development (3) Recommend options for improving Arizona’s system During the second half of 2003, Morrison Institute for Public Policy talked with more than 60 workforce professionals, business people, and workforce board members across Arizona either individually or in small groups, researched other states’ approaches through interviews with officials in other states and national organizations, analyzed responses to an online survey of selected local workforce investment board members, and reviewed a wide variety of materials on economic, workforce, and community development. This report is the first of many steps for Arizona to reflect and act on workforce development governance and its system, because as Thurgood Marshall said, "You can’t stand still. You must move, and if you don’t move, they will run over you."