If just one phrase could describe the 2003 legislative session in terms of protecting Arizona’s land, air, water and quality of life, it would be “many missed opportunities”.

This was understandable — the year saw an influx of freshman legislators with much to learn, a budget crisis that daunted the most seasoned lawmakers and a world in unrest. Nevertheless, Arizona is facing critical challenges to the protection of our natural resources, heritage and lifestyle. While many of these issues received little or no attention from policy makers this year, many legislators spent much of their time and energy on efforts that do not have a clear link to public needs.

Two important laws regarding groundwater management and safe drinking water were passed, and Rep. Tom O’Halleran, R-Dist. 1, effectively used Natural Resources committee time to educate new legislators about complex and vital natural resource issues. However, some of the most critical conservation issues in Arizona, such as water management, forest health, air quality, and protection from toxic hazards saw little legislative action.

Air quality, chemical hazards were essentially ignored by leadership. Rep. Leah Landrum Taylor, D-Dist, 16, again introduced legislation to coordinate agency efforts in responding to chemical fires and toxic releases. While this bill made it through the committee process in the House, it failed to reach the floor. Rep. Deb Gullett, R-Dist. 11, ran legislation to address proper disposal of medical waste, but the bill was never even heard in committee. Likewise, legislation that would have required state agencies to provide notice of pesticide applications in public areas was also never heard.

By contrast, many legislators spent a great deal of time advocating for restrictions and limitations on citizens’ ability to participate in government via the initiative and referendum process. While not directly related to conservation goals, the initiative process has always been an important tool enabling voters to act when the Legislature fails to act in the public interest. Much of the progress made in Arizona on popular conservation issues has been achieved either through initiative or the threat of an initiative. Fortunately, nearly all of the numerous anti-initiative measures were defeated. Two did slip through, with one vetoed by Governor Napolitano and another that will appear on the 2004 ballot.

Conservation interests attempted (unsuccessfully) to prevent a state land exchange measure from winding up on the ballot for the sixth time in the last decade. However, taking legislation that would have undermined local planning efforts statewide was successfully defeated.

This has been a difficult year for our state and our nation. However, we cannot lose sight of what we cherish in Arizona, what brings in new residents and businesses, and what fuels the significant economic engine of tourism. We must keep the future in mind in our decisions today to ensure that the beauty, health and well being of Arizona is preserved for generations to come. We count on our elected officials to help us achieve those goals.

Susan Culp is the assistant director and lobbyist for the Arizona League of Conservation Voters, a statewide nonprofit conservation group headquartered in Tucson. The league works to elect pro-conservation candidates to state office, according to its Web site. The group also publishes a Legislative Scorecard each year. Its Web site is www.azlcv.org