Arizona is the new Nevada

[KB0679]

Arizona is the new Nevada
The Phoenix area is a magnet for people from the Golden State for two reasons: real estate prices and jobs.

By Maria L. La Ganga and Doug Smith, Times Staff Writers
April 24, 2007

BUCKEYE, ARIZ. — Kyle Campos doesn't look like a pioneer, standing behind the counter at Main Squeeze, tossing frozen berries into a whirling blender. And "go East, young man," doesn't have quite the same ring as the 19th century version.

But when he transplanted his family from Santa Barbara to this scorching slice of Sonoran Desert three years ago, Campos accomplished something he never could have done if he'd stayed on the California coast: He bought a house. He started a business.

And he unleashed a flood of family members who followed him here to the Phoenix suburbs to fulfill the same thwarted dreams. First came Aaron, his brother and business partner, with wife and four children in tow. His in-laws, who could never afford a house, came next and bought two. And last year, his mother joined them, buying a home for the first time since her divorce nearly a decade before.

"Living in Santa Barbara, you get used to nothing being under a million dollars, and a million-dollar house is really small," Campos said. "Here, I could build my dream house for less than $300,000. At some point, you weigh the beach versus a realistic life someplace."

These days, that "someplace" is likely to be Maricopa County. For the first time since Nevada became a magnet for Californians in the 1990s, the Phoenix area has nudged Las Vegas aside as the No. 1 destination for people fleeing the Golden State and its soaring home prices.

In fact, the Arizona-bound are at the head of a long parade of bargain hunters marching out of expensive urban California and settling ever eastward, in Riverside, San Bernardino, Buckeye, Phoenix.

Tax returns for 2005, the most recent data available, show that a net 11,375 households — representing nearly 29,000 people — moved from California to Maricopa County in 2004. At the same time, a net 10,657 households with about 23,000 members moved from California to Clark County, Nev.

"Housing isn't cheap in Vegas anymore, nor is it in Phoenix, compared to what it was. But it's still cheap compared to California," said R.L. Brown, publisher of the Phoenix Housing Market Letter. "We're averaging 9,000 Californians a month changing their [driver's] licenses to Arizona. To me, that's a phenomenal number."

As much as California has beckoned adventurers throughout its history, the state has had an equally long tradition of defectors, in search, at least in the last generation, of destinations with fewer cars and cheaper houses.

In the 1980s, the Pacific Northwest decried the hordes of "Californicators" who snapped up real estate and filled freeways in Starbucks' stamping ground. After that, Sin City and its non-neon environs reigned supreme: no state income tax; no brainer.

But then home prices in the Silver State took off like a drunken gambler's dreams. Between 2003 and 2004, the median price of a Las Vegas-area house jumped 40%, according to DataQuick Information Systems. Phoenix started looking better and better.

February's median home price — the level at which half of all home sales are above and half below — speaks volumes about California migration patterns. Los Angeles County: $528,000. Las Vegas area: $300,000. Phoenix area: $253,000.

Maricopa County, here we come.

At least that's what members of the extended Campos family thought when they moved to the western suburbs of Phoenix, a vast, wind-swept expanse that looks like the Central Valley with saguaro. Most of them ended up in Verrado, a New Urbanist development in the shadow of the White Tank Mountains.

Real estate experts here would place the subdivision at the higher end of Phoenix's offerings; unlike most other new developments, which look as raw as a fresh haircut, it boasts its own tree-lined shopping district. It has a grocery store and a pharmacy, a bank and restaurants like the Campos' juice and smoothie bar, where Kyle and Aaron sell drinks named after California beach towns.

Still, an earth-tone bungalow with a red tile roof, a Craftsman-style front porch and two to five bedrooms will cost somewhere in the $200,000 to $300,000 range. For anyone house hunting in Greater Los Angeles, that pretty much qualifies as a steal.

At least that's what Patricia and Joe Ornelas found. She's 34 and an architectural designer who grew up near Chavez Ravine and loves the Dodgers. He's 33 and a construction manager who had a chance to move his job to Tempe. A couple of years ago they adopted Penelope from China.

In January, they stepped into the quintessential CA-to-AZ story line, which goes something like this: Buy a fixer-upper in Alhambra for $240,000. Sell it five years later for $600,000. Pay off all your debts. Buy a four-bedroom house, complete with office, gym and pool, 25 miles outside of Phoenix. Have enough money left over so mom can stay home with baby and start adopting child No. 2.

"I never thought we'd leave," Patricia Ornelas said of her Los Angeles-area home. "I'm a metropolitan girl. But it was a rat race for us…. Our ultimate goal was to move to South Pasadena. But we'd still have to work like dogs to keep up with the house. It just wasn't worth it."

But real estate prices unheard of in metropolitan California aren't the only reason that Maricopa is the fastest-growing county in the fastest-growing state in America.

The other part of the equation is jobs.

Unemployment runs on average about 4.2%, said Barry Broome, president and chief executive of the Greater Phoenix Economic Council, and "would be lower, but we add 100,000 to 130,000 people each year."

Skeptics argue that the local economy leans too heavily on the building industry, and Broome acknowledges that the region is far more reliant on construction jobs than is the nation as a whole. Still, a boom in commercial building has helped ease the pain of a housing market that has cooled considerably. And Arizona has benefited greatly from a particular brand of California export: the young technology worker.

Construction aside, the No. 1 industry sector in Arizona is professional and business services. That's a fact that Ray Aleman could easily have explained from his seat in section 108 at Chase Field.

There he was one balmy Tuesday night, wearing a Fernando Valenzuela jersey purchased at the Montebello Town Center mall and watching the Dodgers clobber the Arizona Diamondbacks for the second night in a row.

Aleman is from East Los Angeles, a graduate of Garfield High. But back in 1996, when California was struggling to shake off a recession, his bosses at Wells Fargo told him he could move along with his job to Arizona or look for work in his hometown.

It was a pretty simple decision: Los Angeles, unemployment. Maricopa County, a job in the Wells Fargo imaging department. Los Angeles, a lifetime of renting. Arizona, a four-bedroom house with a pool on half an acre in suburban Mesa, purchased for $140,000 in 1999.

"Can you get anything for $140,000 in L.A.? Not even in Compton," Aleman said. "My house doubled in five years. It was like, wow. That's the main reason people from L.A. come here."

Sure there are things he misses about Los Angeles, and he ticked them off in precise order: The Dodgers. The Lakers. Tommy's. Shakey's. King Taco. Oh, and his parents are still there. But it's only six hours away, and he visits twice a year.

As for the future: "I won't go back."

[ocman]

Predictions on when New Mexico will be the new Arizona?

[BlackRedGold]

Predictions on when New Mexico will be the new Arizona?

When the difference in housing prices between New Mexico and Arizona are similar to the current difference between Las Vegas and Arizona.

[Buckeye Native 001]

Housing prices are already ridiculous in Phoenix thanks to Californians fleeing.

My parents bought their 1200-square foot house for $125,000 in 1996. It was appraised last year for $330,000. :rolleyes:

[BTinSF]

I think this story is a little behind the times.

I, a Californian, bought my second home in Arizona, in 2001 for $89,000. A year ago, I probably could have got $160,000 for it; today maybe $150,000. That's certainly still a lot less than it would cost in the Bay Area, but frankly, I could not live in Arizona all year as I can in the Northern California. Arizona is beautiful in the late fall, winter and spring, but the summers are brutal and make inpossible the kind of "windows-open" indoor/outdoor lifestyle I value.

My place
http://im1.shutterfly.com/procserv/47b6d927b3127cce8afa93966f2a00000016100Acsmblw0ZsmLA

My place is in the exurbs of Tucson, though, not Phoenix. I never even considered Phoenix which--I have to be honest here--to me is a car-dependent, traffic and smog-choked LA clone without the beaches and near-ideal climate. It also doesn't have the gambling and world-class excitement, dining, entertainment of Las Vegas. And those things also equal employment for folks needing a job, by the way.

Sorry to take a "city vs. city" attitude, but the beginning article sets up the comparisons and for me they just don't work very well. With real estate prices having nearly doubled since I found Arizona attractive, I might not do it today; or I might do as ocman suggested and look even further east in New Mexico although I was looking primarily for warm, sunny winter weather and New Mexico, being higher, is both colder and wetter than Tucson. Snow is not rare in Santa Fe (or Silver City) after all--nor are those places cheap.

[vertex]

Well, when housing prices continue to depreciate rapidly, developers build poor housing-stock quality/variety, the city fights tooth-and-nail for every molecule of water, residents cope with ridiculous tourist-generated traffic, and crime continues to rise, it's easy to see that vegas is longer an easy option for anyone, even Californians.

[Fuzzyinmourning]

What area is your second house located BTinSF?

[arbeiter]

Man, I'll never understand that Arizona-style architecture.
I mean, Taco Bell abandoned it in like 1980!

It's such that the adage 'drive until you're qualified' means that people will live virtually anywhere. Unlike great American migrations of the past, people aren't using the opportunity to improve anything but their material worth. Chicago, the ultimate "go west" city, replied to the naysayers by inventing the skyscraper, building world-class parks and monuments, establishing universities with global draw, and the list goes on. There was a time when being the new boomtown meant that you could actually do things BETTER - all I see with places like Phoenix is the opportunity to vaguely mimic a California lifestyle at a cheaper price. Phoenix should be acting like Chicago did in 1890.

** I'll give some amount of credit to Las Vegas, because at least it's doing something relatively unique.

[BTinSF]

What area is your second house located BTinSF?

Green Valley

[Evergrey]

IMy place is in the exurbs of Tucson, though, not Phoenix. I never even considered Phoenix which--I have to be honest here--to me is a car-dependent, traffic and smog-choked LA clone without the beaches and near-ideal climate. It also doesn't have the gambling and world-class excitement, dining, entertainment of Las Vegas. And those things also equal employment for folks needing a job, by the way.

I'm asking because I'm ignorant... but what is the difference between Phoenix and Tucson? I always assumed Tucson was just a mini-Phoenix.

[BTinSF]

Man, I'll never understand that Arizona-style architecture.
I mean, Taco Bell abandoned it in like 1980!



Of course you don't understand it. You don't live here. If you did, you'd realize the value of thick masonry walls, walled courtyards with water features, reflective or tiled roofs, tile floors and xeroscaping. Territorial architecture is endigenous to the Southwest. Taco Bell is part of a corporate conglomerate from Kentucky more interested in selling chicken to the Chinese and cardboard tacos to gullible New Yorkers than putting up authentic regional architecture here in America, and never built more than foam and stucco parodies of it anyway. You want us to live in copies of Lower East Side tenements just 'cause you understand those?

[BTinSF]

I'm asking because I'm ignorant... but what is the difference between Phoenix and Tucson? I always assumed Tucson was just a mini-Phoenix.

Whoa, pardner! Them could be fightin' words. ;)

Tucson sits on land that was part of the old Gadsden Purchase, the last major addition of Mexican territory to the US in 1853. It was continually occupied by native Americans, who called it "Shuc-shone" or "Stuk-zone" (meaning "water at the foot of black mountain"), for 12000 years. Spanish settlers arrived in the area, having come up the Santa Cruz River valley from Mexico (which today is only about an hour's drive down I-19) in 1699 when they built Mission San Javier del Bac (rebuilt several times, the most recent structure from 1783 is still considered by many the best example of Spanish colonial architecture in the US--for more pictures see http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=127948):

Mission San Javier del Bac (Courtesy Wikipedia)
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d4/Mission_San_Xavier_Arizona_USA.jpg/800px-Mission_San_Xavier_Arizona_USA.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d4/Mission_San_Xavier_Arizona_USA.jpg/800px-Mission_San_Xavier_Arizona_USA.jpg

Later, in 1775, they established a presidio ("fort") and then a settlement. Tucson was and remains very hispanic in origins and character. Having been Arizona's territorial capital from 1867 to 1877, Tucson is the home of "Arizona's oldest university", the U. of Arizona which dominates the city's cultural life, even to the extent of giving its politics a "bluish" tint such that it regularly elects Democrats to both city government and Congress. It is also fairly compact in size with a metro area population of just over 1 million and it sits about 1000 ft higher giving it a climate regularly about 10 degrees cooler than Phoenix in summer. In winter, there is often skiing at the top of Mt. Lemmon which dominates the city.

Tucson (courtesy Wikipedia): The cluster of midrise buildings beyond the (few) downtown highrises are on the campus of the U. of Arizona
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/85/CatalinasAndTusconAZ.JPG/800px-CatalinasAndTusconAZ.JPG
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/85/CatalinasAndTusconAZ.JPG/800px-CatalinasAndTusconAZ.JPG

Phoenix, on the other hand, was founded by an ex-Confederate soldier in 1867 and has always had more of an "Anglo" character. In recent times it has been politically very red. It is 4 times the size of Tucson at about 4 million in the metro area. As noted above, it is significantly hotter in the summer and rarely gets snow or freezing weather in winter as Tucson sometimes does. One of its suburbs is home to Arizona State U.

Phoenix (Courtesy Wikipedia)
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f3/PhoenixDowntown.jpg/770px-PhoenixDowntown.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f3/PhoenixDowntown.jpg/770px-PhoenixDowntown.jpg

[arbeiter]

Of course you don't understand it. You don't live here. If you did, you'd realize the value of thick masonry walls, walled courtyards with water features, reflective or tiled roofs, tile floors and xeroscaping. Territorial architecture is endigenous to the Southwest. Taco Bell is part of a corporate conglomerate from Kentucky more interested in selling chicken to the Chinese and cardboard tacos to gullible New Yorkers than putting up authentic regional architecture here in America, and never built more than foam and stucco parodies of it anyway. You want us to live in copies of Lower East Side tenements just 'cause you understand those?

I've been to Arizona plenty of times. I understand the masonry walls, but they don't mean everything has to look like a personal 'mission' or sprawling hacienda. And I was joking about Taco Bell. I'm aware that they're based out of Louisville. And no, I wouldn't suggest everyone live in a tenement building, they're inherently imperfect and those I know who live in them have to deal with a lot of shortcomings. I don't live in a tenement. I was just saying I didn't find Arizona-style architecture appealing. Now if you prove to me that Arizona architecture has to look like a fake pueblo every time due to the walls and the inherent climatological nuances of the desert, then fine, but I think it's just aesthetically kind of dumpy.

[KEVINphx]

BT, its a little silly to say that your place in AZ is in a Tucson exurb and in the same post say that part of the reason you chose it was because phoenix is too auto oriented! lol, unless you are somehow less auto-oriented in your exurb there.

Probably due to just the sheer size, but I would venture to guess that there are FAR more areas in Phoenix you can get by without a car....places in the Central Corridor, areas along Camelback Road, areas of Maryvale, downtown Tempe, downtown Scottsdale and a few others ....especially if one uses the bus to go short distances (under 3 miles or so)

On another note, obviously Phoenix is NO LA especially concerning things to do, beaches, climate etc. But one thing Phoenix does have on LA and Vegas both is cleanliness. Even the ghetto areas of the valley are NOTHING compared to how filthy Vegas (mostly the strip) and Los Angeles are. Obviously wealthier areas of all cities are fairly nice but overall, garbage pollution in phoenix isnt nearly as visible as in vegas and LA (im sure that has to do with the sheer number of people who visit both cities)

But personally, I'd choose Phoenix any day over Vegas. Sure Vegas has better nightlife and restaurants, but Scottsdale Phoenix and Tempe aren't bad and are (in my opinion) MUCH nicer.

Besides, the desert surrounding phoenix is a more lush than that around vegas lol

[BTinSF]

BT, its a little silly to say that your place in AZ is in a Tucson exurb and in the same post say that part of the reason you chose it was because phoenix is too auto oriented! lol, unless you are somehow less auto-oriented in your exurb there.



I don't actually come here to get by without a car. One small part of the reason I come here is get reaquainted with my car since I leave it here, not needing it in San Francisco. But in actuality, I don't drive it much. I've got a little Stella 150cc motor scooter and that's mostly what I drive around Green Valley (as you may know, a lot of locals drive golf carts on the streets many of which have lanes for them, and the more fit ride bikes in town). The car is mostly used for trips to Tucson and Nogales, Sonora (my favorite Mexican restaurant is there).

[KEVINphx]

Here are some better examples of Arizona architecture or unique architecture, maybe just call it Southwest architecture (as homes like that of BT are not that commonly built anymore!

I just found these doing a google image search:

...

thats all, im too lazy right now and need to sleep lol, but check out this for slideshows on some of the valley's "unique" homes.....obviously most of phoenix is tract housing, but this thing they do here turns up some cool gems every now and then especially with some of the older homes! check it out!

http://www.azcentral.com/home/home2/

[arbeiter]

Kevin, that is some nice stuff you posted. I imagine it's not the vernacular style, though... those are unique examples.

[BTinSF]

The "vernacular style" is beige stucco over wood frame made to look like adobe with a red tile roof. My house is actually thick masonry which is hard to find but is what I liked about it--that and the walled garden. I also confess I like the territorial style as opposed to the more common "pueblo" style, so we'll just have to disagree on the matter of aesthetics. Territorial is somewhat unusual in urban areas though you see more of it on ranches and "ranchettes". Most large custom houses in Tucson are pueblo--modern architecture as in the photos is pretty rare around here, but I imagine more common in Phoenix or Scottsdale.

[fflint]

Even if one links to photos found on Wikipedia or Google, one must still credit each photo. Come on guys.

[Buckeye Native 001]

I'm asking because I'm ignorant... but what is the difference between Phoenix and Tucson? I always assumed Tucson was just a mini-Phoenix.

To add to what BT already said, Tucson has more hills than Phoenix, which is mostly flat.

[KEVINphx]

Even if one links to photos found on Wikipedia or Google, one must still credit each photo. Come on guys.



Then I'll refrain from linking any photos taken by someone other than myself. I did not claim to be the photographer, or attempt to take any credit at all. For christ sake, they are photos from real estate web sites, and this is a silly forum post NOT some essay for school! I'll never understand the nazi rules on this forum! I'm surprised one isn't required to follow proper MLA format and bibliography as well!

[MayDay]

^Usually if a rule is in place, it's because someone has complained. You're right, a few posts from a real estate site likely isn't a big deal but so many times, forumers have posted dozens of images that they didn't photograph. That's why the City Photos section was split into two subsections. It's also a problem if the photographer is hosting images on their own site (bandwidth use, etc.)

Rules like that have to be enforced across the board, because even though what you did could be considered something minor - another person could (and likely would) point it out and say "why are they allowed to do it?". Trust me, having to be a babysitter/chaperone of a 13,500 member forum is NOT easy - however, having rules that might be considered a little heavy-handed makes it easier.

Btw, can you check your PMs? I sent you a followup but didn't hear back. Thanks :)

[fflint]

I'll never understand the nazi rules on this forum!
Forum crediting rule = Holocaust + WWII

Right.

[KEVINphx]

Forum crediting rule = Holocaust + WWII

Right.

OH PLEASE! its a damn sarcastic comment. did you never see the seinfeld episode w/the soup nazi?

whatev, if you choose to leave your sense of humor at the door, enjoy!

[KEVINphx]

Btw, can you check your PMs? I sent you a followup but didn't hear back. Thanks :)

oh yes, i meant to get back to you.... i have to do a little asking around as im not a big beer drinker, actually, i will ask my father of places ....he's sure to know! anyway. srry bout that! very busy outside this forum lol

[JManc]

tucson is a lot more laid back and "small townish" than phoenix. and rather liberal. i loved tucson and could easily live there.

http://www.pbase.com/mancusoj/image/24929523.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/mancusoj/image/24929534.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/mancusoj/image/24929481.jpg

[AZheat]

I think this would be a good time for anybody who wants to move to Phoenix. I've had my house for sale for over six months and I've lowered the price three times. There's such a huge number of homes for sale that prices are generally going down and it's definitely a buyer's market. Within about two blocks on my street there's now seven houses for sale. After that huge surge in prices in Arizona it's becoming reasonable again, that's probably why we're becoming popular again. My realtor said there's at least an eight month supply of inventory. Anybody want to buy a house?:)

[BTinSF]

Among states, Nevada ranks #1 in car theft. Arizona is #2.

Among cities, Las Vegas is #1. Phoenix is #4. Tucson is #10.

Top ten metro areas by per capita auto theft rate

Las Vegas/Paradise, Nev.
Stockton, Calif
Visalia/Porterville, Calif.
Phoenix/Mesa/Scottsdale, Ariz.
Modesto, Calif.
Seattle/Tacoma/Bellevue, Wash.
Sacramento/Arden-Arcade/Roseville, Calif.
Fresno, Calif.
Yakima, Wash.
Tucson, Ariz.

Source: http://money.cnn.com/2007/04/23/autos/auto_theft_hot_spots/index.htm?postversion=2007042408

[holladay]

So does the West Coast have a huge market for stolen cars? Is it organized crime or just small-timers?

[vertex]

:previous: It's organized, and they all end up across the border.


w00t! Phoenix drops to 4th...:banana:

[LMich]

It's not just the West Coast, just about any city on an international border (or with direct connections to border cities) in this country has noticeably higher rates of car theft.

[Ronin]

Other than the two in WA, all of those are hot weather cities as well. Maybe there is a correlation? :shrug:

[vertex]

Doubt it. How would the weather account for previous car theft capitals like Detroit or anytown, New Jersey...

[PacificNW]

Fresno, Modesto, Sacramento and Stockton are hardly close to any international border. :D

[R@ptor]

I'm always surprised that the entire boom seems to be only focused on Arizona and Nevada. Washington State and Oregon could cope so much better with a fast population growth. Unlike AZ and NV they got plenty of water, a moderate climate the entire year and there are also tons of Hightech jobs in the Pacific Northwest (Boeing, Microsoft, Amazon,...)

[Capsule F]

Arizona wastes more water then Nevada now?

[BTinSF]

^^^I know it's un-PC to suggest it, but like the AZ and NV towns, those CA Central Valley spots have significant populations either in them or nearby with connections south of the border. I don't think they have to be geographically that close--they just have to have business connections to the gangs or whoever it is that disposes of the vehicles in Mexico because that's where a lot of them end up.

[fflint]

I'm always surprised that the entire boom seems to be only focused on Arizona and Nevada. Washington State and Oregon could cope so much better with a fast population growth. Unlike AZ and NV they got plenty of water, a moderate climate the entire year and there are also tons of Hightech jobs in the Pacific Northwest (Boeing, Microsoft, Amazon,...)
Washington and Oregon certainly saw an influx of Californians in the '80s and '90s. It seemed like all my high school buddies were moving to Seattle--even before the grunge thing.

Today, though, Seattle and Portland aren't cheap. Californians are still moving to the northwest, though--but they're bypassing Washington and Oregon and hitting up places like Boise, Idaho.

The current wave of ex-pat Californians are, almost uniformly, families looking for an inexpensive home in which to raise their kids. Nevada provided; it still does, but to a lesser extent. Arizona is apparently now getting some spillover.

[BTinSF]

Arizona wastes more water then Nevada now?

Doubtful. But why do you suggest it? This is another difference between Phoenix and Tucson, though. Phoenix has historically followed more closely to the Las Vegas model of water profligacy with green lawns, artificial lakes etc. Both cities seem to be changing in that regard now, but Tucson has never been a water waster. With the exception of a few postage-stamp spaces in the oldest neighborhoods, you'll only see grass in Tucson on golf courses where it's often watered with treated wastewater. And there's no water spraying around in monster fountain displays a la Vegas.

For a long time, Arizona did not use all of its allotment of Colorado River water but we realized if we didn't use it up, California and Nevada would steal it, so now in Tucson, where the Central Arizona Project canal ends, the water is pumped into the underground aquifer to replenish it--the city currently gets most of its tap water from wells using that same aquifer but the ground water is purer than water directly from the Colorado.

[BTinSF]

The current wave of ex-pat Californians are, almost uniformly, families looking for an inexpensive home in which to raise their kids. Nevada provided; it still does, but to a lesser extent. Arizona is apparently now getting some spillover.

I can tell you from direct experience there are (or were until the recent housing slump) huge numbers of California retirees cashing out on the monster profits on their homes and moving to Arizona. You can sell that house in coastal CA you bought in the 50's or 60's for 7 figures and buy something as spacious in Tucson or Phoenix for around $300K. It leaves you with a retirement nest egg of $700K+. And lots of people have been doing it over the last decade.

Unlike Nevada, Arizona has a state income tax (lower rate than CA's), but does not tax many pensions.

[fflint]

^What kind of "huge numbers" are we talking about here?

[MtnClimber]

Washington and Oregon certainly saw an influx of Californians in the '80s and '90s. It seemed like all my high school buddies were moving to Seattle--even before the grunge thing.

Today, though, Seattle and Portland aren't cheap. Californians are still moving to the northwest, though--but they're bypassing Washington and Oregon and hitting up places like Boise, Idaho.

The current wave of ex-pat Californians are, almost uniformly, families looking for an inexpensive home in which to raise their kids. Nevada provided; it still does, but to a lesser extent. Arizona is apparently now getting some spillover.

Its because Places like Seattle have become so outrageously expensive. Californians are like bugs that spread to every corner of a rottting tree. They are the most disliked group of people in the western united states. :haha:

[williasj]

Arizona wastes more water then Nevada now?

I never really know how to answer this except that Nevada does get the least water from the Colorado river compact. the exact totals for the two states are: Arizona 2.8 million acre feet a year and Nevada 300,000 acre feet a year. An acre foot is roughly understood to be enough water to supply a family of four a year. Going from that Arizona has a population of 5.1 million in 2000 , and Nevada's entire allotment goes to Clark County (Las Vegas Metro) with a population of 1.9 million as of 2007. Further, Arizona has other sources of water than the Colorado, and uses some of its Colorado river allotment for agriculture. Clark County being an urban area basically uses none of its river allotment for agriculture. Anyway diving the allotment by number of people would give you these numbers:
Arizona: 2.8 million acre feet / 5.1 million people = .55 (rounded) acre feet per person per year
Nevada: 300,000 acre feet / 1.9 million people (Clark County only)= .16 (rounded) acre feet per year per person
So according to these numbers Las Vegas uses per person less water than Arizona per person. However, as I said they aren't really comparable as Las Vegas uses its entire allotment and Arizona banks some of it allotment and uses some on agriculture. Further, given Las Vegas' proximity to Lake Mead which is the main Colorado River Resivoir we can recycle nearly all of our water used inside and send it back to the lake in order to stretch our water supply; the only "wasted" water is from irrigation of landscaping. I dont knwo how Arizona treats its waste water, it is something I am actually curious about.

For the record, I am from Las Vegas but was just trying to present an unbiased analysis of the question. However, there is quite a bit of information I do nto know about arizona's water uses and sources. Please feel free to add.

[williasj]

Arizona wastes more water then Nevada now?

I never really know how to answer this except that Nevada does get the least water from the Colorado river compact. the exact totals for the two states are: Arizona 2.8 million acre feet a year and Nevada 300,000 acre feet a year. An acre foot is roughly understood to be enough water to supply a family of four a year. Going from that Arizona has a population of 5.1 million in 2000 , and Nevada's entire allotment goes to Clark County (Las Vegas Metro) with a population of 1.9 million as of 2007. Further, Arizona has other sources of water than the Colorado, and uses some of its Colorado river allotment for agriculture. Clark County being an urban area basically uses none of its river allotment for agriculture. Anyway diving the allotment by number of people would give you these numbers:
Arizona: 2.8 million acre feet / 5.1 million people = .55 (rounded) acre feet per person per year
Nevada: 300,000 acre feet / 1.9 million people= .16 (rounded) acre feet per year per person
So according to these numbers Las Vegas uses per person less water than Arizona per person. However, as I said they aren't really comparable as Las Vegas uses its entire allotment and Arizona banks some of it allotment and uses some on agriculture. Further, given Las Vegas' proximity to Lake Mead which is the main Colorado River Resivoir we can recycle nearly all of our water used inside and send it back to the lake in order to stretch our water supply; the only "wasted" water is from irrigation of landscaping. I dont know how Arizona treats its waste water, it is something I am actually curious about.

For the record, I am from Las Vegas but was just trying to present an unbiased analysis of the question. However, there is quite a bit of information I do nto know about arizona's water uses and sources. Please feel free to add.

[BTinSF]

^What kind of "huge numbers" are we talking about here?

The original article says:

Tax returns for 2005, the most recent data available, show that a net 11,375 households — representing nearly 29,000 people — moved from California to Maricopa County in 2004 (That's just Maricopa which is Phoenix. Tucson is in Pima County. And there's the rest of AZ) . . . . "We're averaging 9,000 Californians a month changing their [driver's] licenses to Arizona.


Looking at only retirees, the little community where I have a house, Green Valley, is almost entirely transplanted retirees. It has a phone book which classifies people based on where they moved to Arizona from. 10% of the listings are Californians (4 pages out of 39).

[BTinSF]

So according to these numbers Las Vegas uses per person less water than Arizona per person. However, as I said they aren't really comparable as Las Vegas uses its entire allotment and Arizona banks some of it allotment and uses some on agriculture. Further, given Las Vegas' proximity to Lake Mead which is the main Colorado River Resivoir we can recycle nearly all of our water used inside and send it back to the lake in order to stretch our water supply; the only "wasted" water is from irrigation of landscaping. I dont knwo how Arizona treats its waste water, it is something I am actually curious about.


It depends on how you define "use" I suppose. Like I said, Tucson pumps nearly all of its Colorado allotment into the ground (most of it in the Avra Valley) to recharge the aquifer:

Existing and proposed projects for recharging the aquifer (The Central Arizona Project--"CAP"--canal is shown. This carries water from the Colorado River)
http://cals.arizona.edu/AZWATER/publications/sustainability/report_html/full_img/ch3_11.gif

Also, in Tucson there is a growing effort to reuse waste water. Currently, it's used for things like irrigation but most of it is released into the Santa Cruz River (which once flowed all year but is now often dry due to depletion of the aquifer).

Here's more than you ever wanted to know about water in Tucson: http://cals.arizona.edu/AZWATER/publications/sustainability/report_html/

[BnaBreaker]

Tucson is pretty sprawly still, but I personally liked Tucson much more than Phoenix, which I didn't really care for at all. One thing I don't understand though about Tucson is why, given the city's amazing history, the city doesn't take advantage of that more. In my opinion Tucscon could really be a truly special city if they did a lot more to get more in touch with their roots.

[vertex]

I never really know how to answer this except that Nevada does get the least water from the Colorado river compact. the exact totals for the two states are: Arizona 2.8 million acre feet a year and Nevada 300,000 acre feet a year. An acre foot is roughly understood to be enough water to supply a family of four a year. Going from that Arizona has a population of 5.1 million in 2000 , and Nevada's entire allotment goes to Clark County (Las Vegas Metro) with a population of 1.9 million as of 2007. Further, Arizona has other sources of water than the Colorado, and uses some of its Colorado river allotment for agriculture. Clark County being an urban area basically uses none of its river allotment for agriculture. Anyway diving the allotment by number of people would give you these numbers:
Arizona: 2.8 million acre feet / 5.1 million people = .55 (rounded) acre feet per person per year
Nevada: 300,000 acre feet / 1.9 million people (Clark County only)= .16 (rounded) acre feet per year per person
So according to these numbers Las Vegas uses per person less water than Arizona per person. However, as I said they aren't really comparable as Las Vegas uses its entire allotment and Arizona banks some of it allotment and uses some on agriculture. Further, given Las Vegas' proximity to Lake Mead which is the main Colorado River Resivoir we can recycle nearly all of our water used inside and send it back to the lake in order to stretch our water supply; the only "wasted" water is from irrigation of landscaping. I dont knwo how Arizona treats its waste water, it is something I am actually curious about.

For the record, I am from Las Vegas but was just trying to present an unbiased analysis of the question. However, there is quite a bit of information I do nto know about arizona's water uses and sources. Please feel free to add.

FYI, as of this moment, about 2/3 of wastewater generated in the Phoenix metro receives tertiary-treatment. Within about 10 years it will be 100%. All reclaimed water goes to golf courses, lakes, parks, industry, and power plants, or it is recharged into the ground.

...Phoenix has historically followed more closely to the Las Vegas model of water profligacy with green lawns, artificial lakes etc. Both cities seem to be changing in that regard now, but Tucson has never been a water waster. With the exception of a few postage-stamp spaces in the oldest neighborhoods, you'll only see grass in Tucson on golf courses where it's often watered with treated wastewater. And there's no water spraying around in monster fountain displays a la Vegas.

BT, While Phoenix isn't without fault, it has been way ahead of Vegas for a long time, with regards to water banking, reclaimed water, tertiary treatment and conservation.

FYI, Phoenix remains the only southwestern city with it's own semi-sustainable watershed. Over half of our water comes from the Salt and Verde river watersheds, another 10% is groundwater, 7% is reclaimed water. Less than 1/3rd of our water comes from the Colorado, and half of that is banked in aquifers anyway as soon as it arrives.

[williasj]

[QUOTE=BTinSF;2797832]It depends on how you define "use" [QUOTE]

well said, and I might add waste for that matter. there is a lot of water "wasted" in other parts of the country too, and no place has an unlimited supply. some places are just more limited than others.

[AZheat]

I was living in Seattle when it was somewhat reasonable to purchase a home and within a few short years the skyrocketing prices had made it impossible for many people (including myself) to buy anything. These things seem to run in cycles and Seattle is still far more expensive than Arizona cities and that's probably a major reason that Phoenix is drawing more people these days.
And by the way, a great many of us who live in the desert use a very small amount of water and it's getting more that way all the time. Desert landscaping with native plants are typically what new developments are doing. Homes that do have lawns are tiny in comparison to other cities and often are surrounded by desert plants as well.

[Ronin]

I don't think Phoenix is that hot of a market for Bay Area residents anymore. I work in the real estate business up here, so I know many people who invest in other areas, and LV and Phoenix are not necessarily on the top of anyone's list these days. I hear about many people going even farther south, to San Antonio, Dallas, Houston, and even Orlando.

A telltale sign is when people talk about the astronomical cost of living in this area, they will pick a random city, and mention how cheap the housing is there. Phoenix and Las Vegas were the metaphors used maybe 3-4 years ago. Nowadays, it's somewhere in Texas.

[BTinSF]

^^^I think you have to distinguish between younger people without deep roots in CA and those with. Actually, the place I hear mentioned most often among the young and willing to schlepp a long way is Atlanta (I've yet to meet a Californian enamored with Texas but I'll take your word for it). Still older long-time Californians often don't want to go that far because they have family and friends, often children or grandchildren, in California. At least that's what I hear among my southern AZ neighbors as to why they chose Tucson (it's true, not Phoenix).

Also, there may be a difference between SoCal and NoCal. As I well know because I'm going to make the trip tomorrow, the Bay Area is a 14 hour drive from Tucson--for most people (not me) a 2-day trip. But San Diego and LA are straight shots on I-8 or I-10 and easily reached in a one day drive. Also, the desert takes some getting used to for a Northern Californian used to green landscapes, but Californians from places like the Inland Empire and much of San Diego County are pretty much at home.

[fflint]

The original article says:
Right, but you--as opposed to the article's author--were specifically talking about a "huge number" of retirees moving from California to Arizona, and I was curious to see the statistics you used in coming up with that conclusion.

[AZheat]

Right, but you--as opposed to the article's author--were specifically talking about a "huge number" of retirees moving from California to Arizona, and I was curious to see the statistics you used in coming up with that conclusion.
I did find on the census bureau that when you compare the number of people moving in and moving out that Arizona between 2000-2004 had a plus 265376 and California had a negative 396,156. I couldn't find any newer data than that and I also couldn't find a breakdown of specific state to state numbers but it did say that Florida, Nevada and Arizona had the greatest state to state gains during that period of time. Of course these numbers don't count immigration from outside the US. California makes up for it's losses in population by large gains in immigration from other countries. I also believe that Arizona has gained a significant number of Californians since these numbers were published but I don't have specific data. News reports, information from realtors, etc. seem to indicate an upward trend though. One of the things that convinces me is the fact that I live in retirement community and I'm sure seeing alot more California plates on vehicles in my community.

[CodyY]

Then I'll refrain from linking any photos taken by someone other than myself. I did not claim to be the photographer, or attempt to take any credit at all. For christ sake, they are photos from real estate web sites, and this is a silly forum post NOT some essay for school! I'll never understand the nazi rules on this forum! I'm surprised one isn't required to follow proper MLA format and bibliography as well!

This has been the funniest comment I have ever read in my life!!:tup: