In the Valley, developing viable long-term transit from where we are currently will be very difficult if key
components continue to remain unaligned. Thus, before getting to the primary purpose of this report, it is important to first establish the players and basic considerations relevant to the effectiveness of a transit system.

Few would dispute that the Phoenix metropolitan area is severely lacking in terms of mass-transit compared to other similarly sized and configured cities. The Valley’s fleet of roughly 400 buses is about one-third of the service found in San Diego, Atlanta, and Seattle. In addition, most of Phoenix’ peer regions either already have, or are planning rail systems. Of the 30 largest metropolitan areas in the U.S., only six -- Phoenix included -- do not currently have or are not planning to add rail to their transit system.

Presents brief background information on urban growth management and analyzes certain current and differing viewpoints on how best to accomplish this in Arizona. Two competing plans have emerged recently. One is a citizen initiative, while the other is a proposal that could either be passed into law during the current legislative session or could be referred by the legislature to voters in November, effectively placing it in competition with the citizen initiative.

In step with other organizations, the Greater Phoenix Economic Council (the Valley’s regional public-private economic development organization) published a comprehensive 10-year economic development strategy that codified its change in direction to quality economic development in aerospace, bio-industry, advanced business and financial services, technology, and software. In early 2004, the Governor’s Council on Innovation and Technology issued Building Arizona’s Knowledge-Based Economy with scores of recommendations on venture capital, higher education, collaboration, workforce development, and other topics. Separately, each of these items would have been notable. Taken together, they demonstrate a strong commitment to the growth of a knowledge economy and to the multifaceted approaches needed to develop it.

The Governor's Strategic Partnership for Economic Development has identified 12 industry clusters in Arizona that collectively drive the economy. The term "cluster" refers to a geographic concentration of interdependent companies, suppliers, products, labor pool, and institutions that together constitute an important competitive advantage for a region. Tourism is recognized as one of Arizona's 12 industry clusters. In northern Arizona it ranks as the dominant cluster.

Much of the analysis in this report is based on the concept that industry clusters act as primary growth influences on local economies. Strong clusters produce goods or services that can be sold to consumers outside the region, creating a flow of revenue into the region. This influx of revenue stimulates economic activity in other areas of the local economy such as the retail, real estate, or constructions sectors.

This report profiles the tourism cluster in Coconino County with special focus on the Page area. It examines the cluster's composition, relative size, and importance to the regional economy, and it addresses the cluster's dynamics and requirements for growth. In its conclusion, it presents a menu of options for strengthening the cluster in the Page area.

No American metropolis has been more loved or hated than Los Angeles. Witness how for 25 years Phoenix’s mantra has been “We are not L.A.” Unfortunately, that mantra has not produced an agenda for making Phoenix a better place. “Are nots” and “don’t wants” never turn into action, even when there is agreement on what that action should be. “We Are L.A.?,” the second issue in Morrison Institute’s policy briefing series Forum 411: Engaging Arizona’s Leaders, looks at how smog, congestion, and density have defined the two places. The briefing provides an overview of the two metro regions and how they compare on several important measures. The report not only challenges the myth that Phoenix has become too much “like L.A.,” but also proposes a new way of thinking about what it means to be Phoenix. “We Are L.A,?” argues that metro Phoenix must come up its own homegrown identity more powerful than simply “not L.A.”

This report both updates statistics and perceptions and adds new features. Thus, readers may look at quality of life based on how residents feel or on the trend lines revealed in the numbers. What Matters reports what people think about Greater Phoenix, how they view their own lives, and whether they believe the region is on the right or wrong track. The sections are presented in the order of importance assigned to them by the survey rankings (i.e., Education appears first, Public Safety and Crime second, etc).

What Matters is intended to support decision-making on public issues and to provide a reference for policy makers, civic and business leaders, community activists, and other residents. In response to feedback on previous issues, this edition includes additional indicators for healthcare and more information on higher education. Price and income data have been adjusted for inflation, and more information has been added where appropriate for a fuller picture of trends. Different approaches or completely new sources of data were required in some of this issue’s indicators because of changes in data sources. While every effort was made to choose items that would be stable, there is no way to control for how data are collected or reported over the years. On the whole, however, the 1997 baseline remains intact.

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.

In 1996, ASU’s Morrison Institute for Public Policy began asking residents and leaders in Greater Phoenix, “What does quality of life mean to you, and how do you measure it?” After an 18-month process, the first volume of What Matters was published in September 1997, creating a baseline of opinion and data about “quality of life” and what it means to the people who live here. The report was quickly recognized both within the region and nationally among indicator projects for its simple, yet unique presentation of public perception (survey) data and regional statistical, or indicator, data.

Despite several early attempts in the Arizona Legislature to modify the framework for where the newly-passed Proposition 200 money would go, the four accounts established in the original voter-approved Tobacco Tax and Health Care Act have been maintained as intended since 1995. However, large sums of Proposition 200 revenue – on average $90 million annually – have gone unallocated and unspent by the Legislature.

It’s been more than five decades now since Scottsdale incorporated as a city.During that time, the city emerged as one of the most well-known communities in the Western United States—or, as the local logan says,“The West’s Most Western Town.” From the 1950s onward, Scottsdale combined upscale resorts, an outstanding arts and culture scene, and a spectacular natural setting to create a cachet that few other cities anywhere in the nation could match. So powerful was the Scottsdale name that the city focused on competing nationally with other brand name towns, rather than operating within the context of metropolitan Phoenix.