Quantcast
Home / Opinion / Commentary / Commission should base energy policy on evidence rather than political theatrics

Commission should base energy policy on evidence rather than political theatrics

power-lines-620

Last month, 125 elected and community leaders signed a letter to Arizona Corporation Commission Chairman Doug Little encouraging him and his fellow commissioners to ignore the political fracas and decide the many cases before them on the evidence, merits and what is best for Arizona.

The letter takes no position on any other specific issue. It is filed to two separate electric dockets currently before the ACC to make sure that the point is clear, transparent and available to the public.

“The Commission has always been above the fray providing serious consideration to critical matters facing our State. Unfortunately, rhetoric – not facts – has begun to cloud this complicated and important conversation,” the letter reads in part.

Jessica Pacheco (File photo)

Jessica Pacheco

Proving the point, some are now trying to turn the letter itself into another distraction from the real issues.

Reporters from several media outlets are calling the signatories to this letter to ask if they were misled into somehow appearing to support the APS rate case (purportedly because it is filed to the APS rate case docket), even though the letter clearly takes no position on any particular issue. The reaction of certain signers of the letters to phone calls from the press now becomes the story; behind the scenes, someone is clearly being paid to preserve the status quo.

It is all just too convenient. For three years, every attempt to get serious about the problem has been met with attacks – on APS, certain commissioners, interested legislators who attempt to move the ball forward and so on. Now comes another attempt to embarrass elected leaders, this time simply for voicing the opinion that if Arizona wants a sustainable energy policy for all its residents, the system needs to change and the changes need to result from a serious, policy-oriented look at all of the facts. The best venue for this is the ACC.

In short, these are the kinds of shenanigans the letter is encouraging commissioners to ignore, and instead focus on developing the best energy policy to benefit all Arizonans. We have asked for support from statewide leadership in calling for the commission to make its decisions based on the evidence, instead of political theatrics, which continue today.

Someone is trying very hard not only to distract from the serious discussion that needs to take place, but to prevent that discussion from ever happening. We trust our leaders will take special note of what the letter is asking and then act appropriately.

Jessica Pacheco is Vice President, State and Local Affairs, for Arizona Public Service.

3 comments

  1. Here APS is publicly playing the victim of the reaction it caused, a classic abuser strategy. The “problem” Ms Pacheco wants the Commission to “move the ball forward” on is the ridiculous, outrageous lie that solar households and businesses “transfer costs” to non-solar ratepayers. Nowhere has this ever been shown to be true or even slightly plausible, and energy experts who are not paid by utilities have uniformly rejected the idea as preposterous. Once people and the press penetrate the propaganda and come to understand the facts, they quite reasonably identify the strategy of APS and other utilities across the nation as an attempt to undermine the non-utility solar industry in favor of utility profits and monopoly power. Poor APS!

  2. Warren Woodward

    The letter referenced above was submitted to the ACC docket with a cover letter from APS. So what are people supposed to think? (See the letter and cover letter here: http://images.edocket.azcc.gov/docketpdf/0000170554.pdf )

    Additionally, the letter signed by 125 of APS’s pitchmen is blatant propaganda, not some innocent encouragement of good government as APS’s Jessica Pacheco has attempted to frame it. The letter stated, “Like the Commission, utilities also are established energy and energy policy experts. Serious issues have been identified, like modernizing rates.” Utilities, and especially APS, are established rip-off artists; they are NOT “established … energy policy experts.” And “established” by whom anyway, the pitchmen who signed the letter?

    Also, “modernizing rates” is a term calculated to make anyone against those rates seem archaic, behind the times — not “modern.” Besides, forcing everyone into a rip-off demand rate is NOT modern. It’s as old as thievery itself.

    APS’s Jessica Pacheco wrote: “For three years, every attempt to get serious about the problem has been met with attacks – on APS, certain commissioners, interested legislators who attempt to move the ball forward and so on.” What Jessica obviously does not understand is that “APS, certain commissioners, interested legislators who attempt to move the ball forward” ARE the problem. And what ball exactly is Jessica talking about, the big ball of money that will never be big enough for APS?

    APS’s Jessica Pacheco wrote: “Now comes another attempt to embarrass elected leaders ….” The so called “leaders” who signed APS’s propaganda letter deserve to be embarrassed. But they are probably incapable of that feeling otherwise they never would have signed the letter in the first place.

  3. Milgram Experiment

    How about the shenanigans of when the director of AZDHS unexpectedly left his position not long after a freedom of information request found him stating “intuitively I don’t see a problem with smart meters”. Just good timing? No one to replace him and didn’t know where he was going. We found him down at UofA polluting the minds of our youth.

    The signers need to know what’s really going on, as the press has been silent on the smart meter issue. Too bad that NTP rat cell phone study cancer results came out the day before Memorial Day weekend. Oh yes, that’s how this has been played all along. The chances of those signers having loved ones that have died or suffering (doctors don’t know what’s wrong) due to one of these meters on their bedroom wall are high.

    Pure grass roots here. Looking out for the families of Arizona. Don’t laugh naysayers, you will have blood on your hands….

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

 

x

Check Also

redistricting-620

Gerrymandering – the ‘Efficiency Gap’ is too unstable a measure

With such measurement instability, I don’t think the Efficiency Gap measurement can be considered a reliable indicator of the extent of partisan gerrymandering of Arizona election districts.