Utility providers may soon be required to produce wildfire prevention plans after House approval of HB2201 on Feb. 25. 

The bill, which initially failed to pass over concerns that it went too far to protect power providers from wildfire liability, was approved on its second vote in the chamber, 35-25. 

The bill, if approved by the Senate, would require power entities and electric utilities to prepare wildfire mitigation plans to proactively prevent wildfires and decrease any damages that may occur from a fire. Those new strategies include inspection procedures for wildfire risks, procedures for de-energizing power lines, community outreach and public awareness efforts, and new steps on how power companies will monitor compliance with their plans. 

“If the electric company, power company is at fault, they are liable,” said the bill’s sponsor Rep. Gail Griffin, R-Hereford. “It helps save lives, and properties and ratepayers.”

The bill is a response to the devastating wildfires in Southern California that destroyed thousands of structures and tens of thousands of acres of land in Los Angeles County. 

Many lawmakers originally opposed the bill during its first vote on the House floor on Feb. 18.

That vote occurred before Rep. Neal Carter, R-San Tan Valley, amended the bill to remove a provision that would have prohibited a class action lawsuit from being filed for a cause of action against power providers related to a wildfire. Carter’s amendment also removed language from the measure that initially proposed removing the ability to assign any fault to a provider for their decision to de-energize or not de-energize an electric grid.

Carter said attorneys in California often sue power companies after a wildfire and claim negligence from the company to receive large sums of money in property damage or injury compensation. That procedure, Carter claimed, is too unwieldy for Arizona.

“It drives up rates for the people who purchase power,” Carter said of the civil lawsuits. “It also creates power companies who are gun-shy about leaving the power on when there’s high winds for example, so they shut it off.”

The new HB2201 is an attempt by lawmakers to protect both power companies and consumers by keeping the electric grid energized. 

The bill also raises the burden of proof to clear and convincing evidence for a plaintiff to prevail in a civil lawsuit against a power company, which is a higher standard of proof than the preponderance of evidence standard used in most civil cases, but not quite as rigorous as the beyond a reasonable doubt standard used in criminal proceedings. 

“It means you have to provide evidence that the power company was at fault,” Carter said. “Why should we have California-style energy driving our energy policy here?”

Several members of the Arizona Freedom Caucus voted against the bill, including Rep. Alexander Kolodin, R-Scottsdale, who said he doesn’t believe the bill has functionally changed from when House members first voted against the measure. 

Kolodin offered an amendment on Monday which proposed removing the clear and convincing evidentiary standard. The amendment failed 28-29 after Griffin called it “hostile” and brought it to the floor without Kolodin first discussing it with her.

“I can’t support this bill without the Kolodin amendment,” said Rep. Justin Olson, R-Mesa. Olson is the only member of the legislature who has served on the Arizona Corporation Commission, the governing entity that regulates public utilities across the state. 

Still, the requirement of proactive plans from utility companies prompted support for HB2201 from Democrats interested in bolstering Arizona’s wildfire prevention and response capabilities.

Power providers would be required to submit their plans to the Corporation Commission for review by May 1, 2026, if the bill is signed. Following that date, plans must be submitted every even-numbered year.