Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Rampant corporate greed and cozy commission will devastate ratepayers

Abhay Padgaonkar

Rampant corporate greed enabled by lax oversight was already running Arizona’s ratepayers into the ground. 

Arizona Public Service collected $1.1 billion more than in 2022 after major rate hikes in 2023 and 2024, while Tucson Electric Power’s profits surged 33% following a 10% increase in August 2023. 

Now, APS aims for an extra $580 million and a 14% rate hike, while TEP seeks $172 million more, as both are setting the stage for future increases on an annual autopilot

Growth ain’t paying for growth

APS has justified a substantial rate hike by claiming it’s necessary for growth and grid reliability, but CEO Ted Geisler’s “growth pays for growth” schtick unravels under closer scrutiny.  

Data centers present an existential threat to the power grid. With over 10,000 MW of energy requests pending, demand from just a couple of large data centers could exhaust APS’s entire allocation of 1,146 MW from Palo Verde!

While the weather-normalized average business usage skyrocketed by 9% in a single year, the average household consumption decreased by 1%, with businesses accounting for 91% of the overall growth, primarily due to the data center demand surging at a 100 times faster rate.

Despite this, residential rates increased by 7.4%, more than double the hike for non-residential customers, while industrial rates even dropped by 1.8%, and commercial customers only faced a 3.5% increase. 

Captive homeowners also pay peak rates over three times higher than the sweetheart deals for data centers, with some large customers allowed to bypass APS’s exorbitant prices and purchase cheaper power from third parties. 

No amount of rationalization from data center lobbyists will ever justify struggling homeowners subsidizing Big Tech. 

Corporate greed makes affordability impossible

APS wants us to believe that rapid growth and reliability make exorbitant prices inevitable. It is a ruse. 

Despite flawed claims by the Arizona Corporation Commission about Arizona having the second lowest energy costs, the state ranked 7th highest in total energy price, with the three for-profit monopolies charging more than in 38 states

In contrast, SRP, a large utility with similar customer demand as APS but not regulated by the commission, had among the lowest rates in the Southwest and has consistently ranked as a top utility in the nation for reliability and customer satisfaction

In 2024, APS prices were 25.4% higher than SRP’s, costing customers an extra $1 billion annually for the same amount of electricity.

While SRP plans a modest 2.4% rate increase, APS and TEP are seeking a shocking 14% hike—nearly six times as high. The new rates could make the APS price premium, an unconscionable 40% over SRP for the same commodity.

SRP, a not-for-profit utility, demonstrates that top-notch reliability, customer satisfaction, and affordability can coexist—but only if corporate greed and rubber-stamp regulators are removed.

Putting profits over people

The toxic combination of greedy monopolies and utility-friendly regulators has already led to dire consequences.

In 2024, APS shut off power to 46,000 customers —double the 2021 figure—and wrote off  $33 million as uncollectible revenue, three times the pre-pandemic level as a percentage of revenue. 

Following a 2017 rate increase, two customers died from shutoffs, including Stephanie Pullman, who owed just $52, an amount APS CEO Don Brandt earned in 30 seconds.

In 2024, 82-year-old Kate Korman also died after being disconnected for a $500 bill, while APS CEO Jeff Guldner’s pay tripled from $5.5 million in 2021 to $17.2 million in 2024, driven by rising company profits. 

Meanwhile, Pinnacle West, APS’s parent company, outperformed industry benchmarks for shareholder returns each year since 2022 and raised dividends for 13 straight years, distributing $400 million in 2024.

More devastation coming

Kevin Thompson, the commission chair, seems absurdly concerned about APS filing for bankruptcy

This is for a monopoly worth $10 billion with $26 billion in assets, $5 billion in revenue, the second-highest median pay in the state, and a guaranteed profit margin of 9.8%. APS says this return on equity isn’t high enough and should be 10.7%!

Are we to fall for the misinformed fearmongering that thousands will die unless we pay APS the ransom?

A grave concern is that the rubber-stamp regulators have already fallen prey to the propaganda from the powerful monopolies and have consistently neglected consumer interests.

Don’t hold your breath for any meaningful ratepayer protection from this captured commission.

The seismic shock from the outrageous APS and TEP rate hikes, coupled with the critical LIHEAP lifeline to the most vulnerable being DOGE’d, will only serve as a deadly one-two punch.

Abhay Padgaonkar is a longtime consumer advocate who has served as an expert witness on behalf of ratepayers.

Electric utility lobbying efforts win big in 2025

Key Points: 
  • Electric utility companies had two bills passed to protect their financial assets in 2025
  • Companies like Arizona Public Service Co. have also donated huge amounts of money across Arizona
  • Some officials warn their financial influence could harm Arizonans

Arizona’s largest electricity provider notched two huge financial wins in the 2025 legislative session with last week’s approval of new laws by Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs. 

The victories by Arizona Public Service Co. can largely be credited to the utility’s years-long efforts to curry favor with state officials and local politicians and community and business groups across the state. 

Earning that influence involves APS, or its corporate parent Pinnacle West Capital Corp., giving millions of dollars in donations to politicians, business groups and through the company’s well-organized community giving operation, which doles out money to a broad range of entities like food banks, schools and many others. 

Hobbs alone has benefited from at least $350,000 in Pinnacle West donations to special funds for her inaugural and legal bills. According to filings with the Arizona Secretary of State, the publicly traded company, worth nearly $11 billion, has donated to scores of sitting lawmakers’ political campaigns. 

The company is unapologetic about its role in the legislative process and in spreading around cash.

“We engage in the public policy process for the benefit of our customers, shareholders, employees, communities and other stakeholders,” said spokesman Mike Philipsen.

“We advocate for sound, forward-looking public policy that creates shared value for our business, our community and a vibrant Arizona economy,” he said. “We believe that this participation helps to create more robust and better-informed policy outcomes.”

The resulting good will from these contributions allows APS to mobilize support for its proposals in the Legislature and tap into a broad range of people and politicians outside the Capitol. 

And it paid off big last week. Hobbs signed a bill shielding APS from most lawsuits if its equipment sparks a wildfire and a second allowing it to issue bonds to pay itself for assets like old power plants it needs to sell at a loss.

Issuing bonds will mean a new, separate charge will be added to monthly bills paid by 1.4 million Arizona households or businesses. And the liability protection could save APS billions of dollars if a blaze its equipment sparks destroys a town like Prescott or Show Low. 

That lawsuit number isn’t speculation. Utilities in Hawaii, California and Oregon have paid out tens of billions of dollars to victims of wildfires in the past decade. Although Arizona has not had a similar event so far, APS was concerned it could be the next company to face a threat to its business in the event of a major wildfire. 

Both bills affect other regulated utilities, including Tucson Electric Power, public power providers like Salt River Project and smaller co-ops. They signed on in support and lobbied for the measures.

However, it was mainly APS that initially crafted the measures, garnered the support of the other utilities, and deployed its numerous lobbyists to sell them to lawmakers.

“It shows the kind of political influence they have,” said Sandy Bahr, director of the Sierra Club’s Grand Canyon chapter.

“It’s especially concerning, however, because of what they represent — they are a monopoly utility,” she said. “If we don’t like what they’re doing, how they’re spending our ratepayer dollars, we can’t just go somewhere else for our electricity unless we want to move.”

That leaves state oversight to regulate them.

“We rely on government entities to help hold them accountable – the Corporation Commission, the Legislature and the governor,” she said, “and that’s just not happening.”

Bahr, whose group joined many others in opposing the bills, said the regulated utility’s influence was readily apparent as the proposals moved through various hearings. She noted that, following one Senate committee hearing, there were so many utility lobbyists — most from APS — that she could hardly get through the hallway.

The first new law protects APS from most lawsuits if their power lines cause a fire, even if it obliterates a large town. Initially, the measure gave such sweeping protections from lawsuits that it almost certainly ran afoul of a provision in the state constitution that says lawmakers can’t limit the right to sue or recover damages. 

Class action lawsuits — where community members can band together to sue — would have been banned, and the right to recover for things like lost businesses or the use of a destroyed car would have been barred. And the level of proof needed to win a suit claiming a utility caused a fire would have been raised to near-unattainable levels. 

Minor changes in the House and a major Senate amendment restored many of those rights, but, as signed by the governor, APS still got a lot of what it wanted.

In exchange for creating and largely following a “Wildfire Mitigation Plan,” utilities get the assurance they can’t be sued for failing to take steps to shield the public from equipment-sparked wildfires. But the liability protections remain even if a utility doesn’t completely follow its own plan to minimize fire danger. 

“They are now protected from a lot of wildfire damage liability,” said Sen. Priya Sundareshan, D-Tucson, the Senate minority leader.

Sundareshan voted against House Bill 2201, the wildfire liability measure, but several minority Democrats joined with nearly all Senate Republicans in backing the measure. The same was true in the House, where most Democrats and almost all majority Republicans voted for the liability shield bill.

The bonding measure, called “securitization,” was sharply opposed by Senate Democrats and various health, environmental and consumer advocacy groups. That was mainly because APS wanted to sell their stake in the coal-fired Four Corners Power Plant in northwestern New Mexico rather than shutting down the polluting plant, operated by APS but owned by a consortium that includes APS, a company owned by the Navajo Nation, SRP and Tucson Electric Power.

The plant was supposed to be closed by APS in 2031, but with the securitization law in place, it gives the owners the ability to sell it at a loss, recover their investments through bonds paid by ratepayers and allow the new owners to keep running it.

“This plays into Trump’s coal agenda,” Sundareshan said in an interview before Hobbs approved the measure. She pointed to executive orders signed by the president that encourage continued use of coal and could lead to the restarting of old, polluting coal plants in Arizona and beyond.

“Why should we enable actions that support Trump’s coal agenda?” she asked.

All Senate Democrats opposed the bonding measure, but it earned unanimous support from GOP senators. In the House, all 35 Republicans voted yes along with 10 of 25 Democrats. 

The coalition opposed to the securitization bill — usually aligned with Hobbs — issued a blistering news release after the Democrat signed the measure.

“HB2679 saddles Arizona families with the cost of bad corporate decisions, keeps outdated coal plants running, and offers zero transition support to impacted communities,” JoAnna Mendoza of VetsForward wrote in the news release. “Our communities deserve cleaner air, not corporate bailouts disguised as policy.”

And, in a clear slap at the governor, she said, “Leadership means standing up to powerful interests, not bending to them.”

In addition to the lack of a requirement for plants to be shut down if utility customers are forced to pay off bonds, opponents are concerned that utilities can use bonds for unlimited reasons.

“The bill will benefit Arizona’s largest monopoly electric utilities — APS, TEP, and SRP — to the detriment of ratepayers,” the news release said.

Hobbs issued a lengthy defense of her decision to sign the bill giving utilities the right to issue bonds their customers would pay off. She said she acted to help constituents who complained about high power prices and negotiated with lawmakers to address concerns raised by the opposing groups.

“That’s why I stepped in and fought to make HB2679 a common sense, middle of the road solution for Arizona families,” she said.

“HB2679 will lower costs for everyday Arizonans, improve grid resiliency by growing our energy economy, and ensure utilities are being held accountable to deliver cost savings to Arizonans,” Hobbs continued. “I heard the concerns from clean energy and consumer protection advocates who opposed the original version of this bill, and I made it better.”

Bahr, the Sierra Club’s Arizona director, said the wildfire liability bill and the bonding measure showed just how powerful APS is in the state.

“It is concerning that they are able to spread dollars around in such a way that they’re able to snap their fingers and everyone comes running,” Bahr said. “And that’s on top of being able to have an army of lobbyists to work the bills.”

Philipsen, asked earlier about the utility’s efforts to pass the bills, defended its actions.

“We routinely work with elected representatives to advocate for legislation that impacts APS, our customers or our rates,” Philipsen wrote.

But Bahr called the utility’s ability to get what it wants “really disturbing.”

“I don’t know how to rein them in,” she said. “If the Corporation Commission isn’t going to do it, the governor isn’t; I guess it’s up to the attorney general because the other branches are just not doing it.”

Corp Comm upholds contentious APS solar charge

The Arizona Corporation Commission reaffirmed its decision to allow Arizona Public Service to impose a grid access charge on customers who use residential solar energy, despite solar advocates calling the charge discriminatory.

Commissioners voted three to one to uphold the charge, known as a “GAC,” with Republican Commissioner Lea Marquez Peterson absent from the vote due to a personal emergency. 

The GAC was included in APS’ most recent rate case. Solar advocates asked the commission to reconsider its decision to include the GAC and the regulatory body held a rehearing on the issue near the end of October. 

After over a week of rehearing testimony, administrative law judge Belinda Martin said the commission has full discretion over whether to implement the GAC. In a recommended order to the commission, Martin found that the GAC was not discriminatory to solar customers but that not including it would not be discriminatory to non-solar customers. 

APS said imposing the GAC allows it to recoup the cost it takes to serve residential solar customers. Without a GAC, those extra costs would fall to non-solar customers, according to the company. 

The three Republican commissioners who voted for the charge said they were concerned about the potential costs to non-solar customers if solar customers are not paying their fair share

“I hope we can all agree that all costs related to providing service should be equitably distributed to each class of service,” said Commissioner Kevin Thompson. “But I haven’t heard anything here today or in prior proceedings that disputes inequity exists.”

Groups like Vote Solar and the Arizona Solar Energy Industries Association were joined by state entities like the Residential Utility Consumer Office and the Attorney General’s office in opposing the GAC. The intervenors argued that there was no evidence that solar customers cost more for utility companies to service, and argued that solar customers help reduce costs for companies by providing excess solar energy to the grid. 

Commission Chairman Jim O’Connor went a step further while explaining his vote to uphold the GAC by warning homeowners to be cautious when considering solar energy.

“I would ask homeowners considering solar to do their homework,” O’Connor said. “Solar is a very viable option, but it is not exclusive in its current stand alone capabilities to provide for all [of] a home’s power needs 24/7, 365 days a year.”

Commissioner Anna Tovar, the lone Democrat on the commission, cast the only vote against the GAC, saying she agreed with the intervenors that it is discriminatory.

“This unwarranted charge may have the effect of causing customers not to adopt solar,” Tovar said during the hearing.

Autumn Johnson, an attorney with AriSEIA who participated in the rehearing, said the decision was unsurprising to the parties involved but still misguided. Johnson said many aspects of the hearing “indicated it was a foregone conclusion, and probably our time would have been better spent this entire year on appeal.”

She said details of an appeal are to be determined, but she is certain that at least a few of the intervenors will file to the Court of Appeals sometime next year. The parties must wait for the order on the GAC to be filed before they can move forward with an appeal.

“I think that [the commission’s] decision is arbitrary and capricious and an abuse of discretion and that they have a very strong likelihood of losing on appeal,” Johnson said. 

The Hidden Power of the Arizona Corporation Commission: Why Your Vote Matters

There are a lot of really important issues on your ballot this fall. But it is not just the presidential candidates and the ballot propositions that you need to pay attention to. The Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC) also has three out of its five members up for a vote in November. The ACC is the body that regulates water, gas, and electric utilities in Arizona. A five-member body sets the rates you pay to your monopoly utility every month. They are also in charge of energy policy in Arizona, meaning they decide if we keep using fossil fuels or transition to clean energy.

Autumn Johnson

If you get electricity from Arizona Public Service (APS), Tucson Electric Power (TEP), Unisource, or a rural cooperative, the ACC impacts you. If you get gas from Southwest Gas, the ACC matters to you. If you get water from Global Water, EPCOR, Liberty, or any of these hundreds of companies, the ACC impacts you. If you have or ever hope to have solar panels, an electric vehicle, or an energy-efficient home, the ACC impacts you. If you are concerned about Arizona’s air quality or whether or not we will run out of water, the ACC impacts you.

Just since the last election, the ACC has made important decisions on rates for TEP, APS, Unisource, and Southwest Gas. They voted to prevent community solar from developing in Arizona. They have increased fixed fees on solar customers and decreased the value of the solar those same customers sell back to the grid. They have curtailed several energy efficiency programs. They have also voted to repeal renewable energy and energy efficiency requirements. Solar and energy efficiency are the only ways customers can meaningfully reduce their electric bills. Renewable energy uses less water than fossil fuels and does not contribute to air pollution.

Candidates for the ACC run statewide, meaning there are no districts, so all voters will have the same choices. You will find this race after other statewide and legislative candidates, but before judges and ballot propositions. You should vote for three, not just one, like a lot of other races. A lot of people that fill out a ballot just skip this race. That is because a lot of people do not know what the ACC is, think it only has to do with “corporations,” and do not realize that three people (because simple majority rules) decide nearly everything about electric, water, and gas utilities in the State. 57,000 votes was the difference between winning this election in 2022 and losing. That means your vote matters. And nearly 100,000 people who voted in the 2022 gubernatorial race did not vote in the ACC race.

Six candidates are running for three seats. All of these candidates have websites and social media. In alphabetical order, they are: Ylenia Aguilar (D) (website and social), Jonathon Hill (D) (website and social), Rene Lopez (R) (website and social), Lea Marquez Peterson (R) (website and social), Joshua Polacheck (D) (website and social), and Rachel Walden (R) (website and social). Only Marquez Peterson is an incumbent.

Ballots are mailed out on October 9th. You can request a mail-in ballot until October 25th. You need to mail back your ballot by October 29th. The last day to vote in-person, early is November 1st. Election day is November 5th and polls are open 6am-7pm. Get all of your voting info at the Secretary of State’s website. The ballot is going to be long this year, but take your time and complete all of it. Research the candidates. If you are voting from home, you have a lot of time to review the voter guides, candidate websites, and candidate social media accounts. If you are voting in person, plan ahead. The ACC race impacts you.

Autumn Johnson is the Executive Director of the Arizona Solar Energy Industries Association.

Same APS discrimination against solar customers

Arizona Public Service likes to tout itself as somehow new and different. It is not the APS we remember involved in scandals at the Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC) or opposing...

Get 24/7 political news coverage and access to events honoring top political professionals

New regulations threaten Arizona’s renewable energy industry

Arizona has made tremendous strides in making clean energy an essential part of our economy. Thirteen percent of the state’s energy comes from renewable resources and another 29% comes from...

Get 24/7 political news coverage and access to events honoring top political professionals

Petersen and Toma in court filing aim to quash Prop 211

With efforts by one set of foes already rebuffed, the state’s top Republican lawmakers are making their own bid to quash a new state law designed to shine a light...

Get 24/7 political news coverage and access to events honoring top political professionals

Bright future for EVs, renewable energy in Arizona 

Attorney Court Rich said access to electric vehicles (EVs) and their corresponding charging stations is an important investment for Arizona and federal governments to make. (Photo...

Get 24/7 political news coverage and access to events honoring top political professionals

You don't have credit card details available. You will be redirected to update payment method page. Click OK to continue.