Vistas plan hinges on reform of state land Agency lacks authority to control tract's growth
by Catherine Reagor
Apr. 6, 2006 12:00 AM

It has been four days since the Morrison Institute for Public Policy unveiled its novel proposal for developing Superstition Vistas, a 275-square-mile piece of raw desert on the fringes of the southeast Valley.

It will be many months before the State Land Department, which owns the trust land in Pinal County, will know if it can implement any of the report's suggestions, which include building streets, highways and sewer systems before home construction begins and creating environmentally friendly communities.

That is because the agency has little ability to weigh in on how state land is used or developed. Its sole mission is to sell the land to the highest bidder, in most cases regardless of whom that is or what that person plans to do with the land. advertisement




But a reform measure that voters likely will consider in November would change that. It is one of two that is expected to be on the ballot.

"Reform is necessary and preferably something that gets us more money," said Mark Winkleman, commissioner of the Land Department. "Until there are some changes, we aren't in a position to do anything immediate with the Morrison report."

The $200,000 report was paid for by Pinal County, Mesa, Apache Junction, Queen Creek, Salt River Project, Central Arizona Project and the Sonoran Institute. The sponsors wanted a plan for the development of Superstition Vistas to minimize the impact on their communities or agencies. The region is projected to be home to 1 million people by 2060.

The first public debate of the recommendations will be at a breakfast today in Phoenix.

For any of the atypical development scenarios proposed by the Morrison Institute to happen, big changes must be made in the operation of the Arizona State Land Department.


Generating money


Now, the agency's sole goal is to generate money for education.

It does that by selling parcels of state land in high-growth areas. Last year, it sold a record $515 million in land. But Winkleman says the agency could do better if it had more money to pay for soil, engineering, traffic and zoning reports to help get state land ready for sale more quickly. He says reform would do that.

The agency also could make more money, he says, if it was allowed to work with a firm to prepare the land - obtain proper zoning, build roads, install sewers - before selling it to developers.

One reform measure is a grass-roots initiative called Conserving Arizona's Future and is backed by the Arizona Education Association and the Nature Conservancy. The other is legislation backed by the Arizona Cattlemen's Association and the Home Builders Association of Central Arizona. Rep. John Nelson, R-Glendale, introduced it.

Both would help the Land Department. But many planners, conservationists and developers say only one would give the state agency the money and reform it needs to develop and plan Superstition Vistas instead of just selling it parcel by parcel.

"The State Land Department now only has the ability to sell about 2,000 acres a year. That's not enough to stay ahead of Arizona's growth patterns," said Steve Betts, a real estate attorney and chief executive of SunCor Development. "Only the Conserving Arizona's Future initiative gives the agency what it needs to to sell more land, plan it better and make more money for education."



The agency owns the most land in the state, making it the state's biggest real estate player. But the Land Department must still operate by the laws that created it over 100 years ago and can't compete in Arizona's fast-paced real estate market.

Without reform, Superstition Vistas is likely to be developed the same way as other large parcels of state land. The state would have to sell small pieces of property, developers would build large, expensive homes in sprawling subdivisions, and traffic would snarl almost immediately. Utility companies and governments would struggle to keep up with the growth. And it couldn't set aside the 25,000 acres targeted to be preserved by the Morrison report. Now, the agency can't require that any of the 9 million acres it manages statewide be preserved.


Competing plans


Both plans give the Land Department the ability to give municipalities and the Arizona Department of Transportation land to build roads if they would increase the value of state land around them.

Now, ADOT or cities must buy land to build roads, and that slows the pace of new freeway and road construction.

Both also call for setting aside the almost 43,000 acres that are part of the Arizona Preserve Initiative in Phoenix and Tucson.

That is where the proposals' similarities end.

The legislation that is backed by the cattlemen and home builders associations calls for preserving as much as 400,000 acres of trust land, but the Legislature has to approve every acre or parcel set aside.

Conserving Arizona's Future calls for automatically preserving 259,000 acres and setting aside 358,000 that could be purchased by cities or groups to be preserved.

The Nelson bill also allows the Land Department to lease land for grazing and agriculture without holding auctions.

The plan by Conserving Arizona's Future calls for allowing the Land Department to participate with developers in projects on state land. Under the plan, a board of trustees would also be set up to help with more difficult land decisions. Also, the state agency would get to use a small percentage of its profits to operate.

Nelson's bill passed the state Senate last month and is being heard in the House.

Backers of the Conserving Arizona's Future plan have collected more than 200,000 signatures. They need 184,000 valid ones to get the plan on the ballot.

In the past, voters and the Legislature have turned down proposals to reform the Land Department or set aside more state land for open space because of confusion over the proposals or fighting between ranchers and conservationists.

Rob Melnick, director of the Morrison Institute, said everybody involved in the Superstition Vistas report worked under the assumption that reform was needed to make any of the development scenarios work.

"It will be grim for the development of not only this piece of land but other state land parcels in the path of growth if reform doesn't get passed," he said.