Arizona Electric Customers Deserve Utility Commissioners Who Show Up at Hearings

Democratic candidates Jonathan Hill and Clara Pratte accused the Arizona Corporation Commission, which regulates utility prices, of ignoring struggling electric ratepayers, mishandling data-center growth and retreating from renewable energy.

Republican Commissioner Kevin Thompson defended his record of approving a 10% TEP rate increase in 2023 and an 8% APS rate increase approved in 2024. His GOP running mate, Ralph Heap, was a no-show amid disciplinary proceedings by the Clean Elections Commission.

At a televised debate on September 9, Hill and Pratte accused incumbent Commissioner Kevin Thompson and his absent running mate of presiding over a regulatory body that has grown distant from the ratepayers it’s supposed to protect — starting with a stunning admission about a hearing commissioners simply didn’t attend.

“When Clara and I went to the rate case … we walked in, and at first there was not a single commissioner present at the hearing,” Hill told the audience. “People had driven from all over Arizona to come and testify,” he said, only to find the dais empty. “Not one commissioners showed up,” he added.

One commissioner eventually showed up late, Hill said, and was “very dismissive” of the ratepayers who did speak.

You can watch the debate on YouTube at https://www.youtube.com/live/NL0lwXBYpvo?si=nO-dsx1duoNavOJ3

Thompson defended the no-shows by noting he “attends” hearings remotely. “You don’t have to be in person to hear the testimony,” he said, adding that commissioners “take everything into consideration.”

Hill said one customer described a household so financially strained that the family followed a “one-light policy.”

“If they change rooms in the house, they have to turn one light off before they turn another light on,” Hill said. “That’s how desperate customers have got.”

The story, Hill argued, demonstrated why commissioners must hear directly from ratepayers rather than rely solely on written filings or online testimony. “If the commissioners aren’t even there to hear these stories, how can they make informed decisions?” he asked.

Ignoring affordability in rate increases

The debate came as Arizona customers face higher electric costs, with APS and TEP seeking 14% rate increases. Pratte argued that the commission has failed to account for affordability while repeatedly approving rate increases adequately.

“We’ve seen eight percent, followed by potential fourteen to sixteen percent increases,” Pratte said. “That is not cutting the fat. That is making ratepayers pay for poor planning.”

Pratte said the commission must distinguish between legitimate infrastructure costs and expenses that should not be shifted onto customers. “When they’re making record profits, and we have people dying in the heat, that is something that just doesn’t hold water for me,” she said.

“I would need to see very detailed explanations of exactly what they’re investing into our infrastructure versus how much is going to their investors,” Hill said.

He pointed to more than $600 million in annual profits reported by APS and its parent company, Pinnacle West, during the previous two years.

“That’s $1.2 billion that Arizona customers have paid to this company that then has just left Arizona,” Hill said. “It’s left our economy. It’s not here to help us anymore. It goes to Wall Street and all of their investors.”

Thompson defended the rate-case process, saying utilities are entitled to recover the costs of providing service.

Thompson: “The government can’t take care of everybody”

The candidates also clashed over what the commission should do for people who cannot afford to keep their electricity running during Arizona’s extreme heat.

Hill called for the commission and utilities to provide more comprehensive assistance to struggling families.

“If you’ve fallen behind on your bills months and months and during the summer, there’s probably something more going on than just your inability to pay,” Hill said. “That’s a cry for help.”

Thompson rejected the idea that the commission should support low-income customers. “At some point in time, the government can’t step in and take care of everyone,” Thompson said.

READ: Corrupt Utility Commissioner Kevin Thompson, Who Shills for Data Centers and Fossil Fuels

Pratte said Hill and the other Democratic candidates were not arguing that the commission should solve every social problem. Instead, she said, regulators should work with utilities to prevent vulnerable customers from falling through the cracks.

“Nobody’s saying the commission is going to be going out there and solving any social issues,” Pratte said. “But what we’re saying is it should be a thought partner.”

Data centers raise water and power concerns

The candidates also sharply disagreed over whether the commission was prepared for Arizona’s data-center boom.

Hill called for a pause on new data-center development while regulators and communities assess the risks. “Right now there are just so many unknowns,” he said. “We need to pump the brakes.”

Hill said the commission “was completely unprepared for the data center issue.”

“They did not do their homework,” Hill said. “They did not see these things coming until we already had quite a few built, and the communities around them realized what they were doing.”

Hill said data centers could increase electricity and water bills, reduce water availability, and create noise and heat pollution.

“They were raising their electricity bills,” he said. “They were raising their water bills. They were reducing the availability of water in their communities.”

He warned that customers could ultimately be responsible for infrastructure built to serve speculative projects that never become economically viable.

“If the bubble bursts, which I predict it will very soon, the AI bubble bursts, the financing behind these facilities goes bad, that the taxpayers, the voters, the customers are going to be on the hook for paying for a bunch of stranded infrastructure,” Hill said.

Pratte said the commission should coordinate more closely with cities, tribes and local governments.

“Development pays for development,” Pratte said, endorsing the principle that large-load customers should cover the infrastructure costs associated with their projects.

Thompson said the commission’s role is to ensure that if the utility is going to serve, that the consumer is protected,” Thompson said.

“If it’s specific to a development, that development is paying the cost, period,” Thompson said.

Commission undermines solar energy

Thompson defended the commission’s decision in March to repeal Arizona’s Renewable Energy Standard and Tariff rules, which had been in effect for 20 years. The rules required electric utilities to get 15% of their power from renewable energy.

The commission also undermined home solar customers in 2016 by repealing “net metering” in 2016. As a result, TEP can sell electricity at 15.6 cents per KWh. However, when solar users return electricity to the grid, TEP pays only 5.2 cents per kWh. It’s a blatant ripoff.

Thompson said utilities had already met the intent of the standards and that continuing them imposed unnecessary costs. “It was just an added expense onto the utilities that ends up going to the consumer,” Thompson said.

Pratte said she would have voted to retain and modernize the standards. “You don’t throw the baby out with the bath water for something that is working,” she said.

“Solar also happens to be the cheapest form of energy at the moment,” Pratte said. “We should be backfilling as much as we can with solar because it is less expensive.”

Hill argued that Arizona’s reliance on imported fossil fuels leaves customers vulnerable to volatile markets and geopolitical events. “The price of solar is very reliable,” Hill said. “You can predict what it’s going to be years ahead of time.”

“What is the price of gas? What is oil going to be today? Is there a war in Iran?” Hill said. “Suddenly, huge price fluctuations. “We need to make sure that Arizona is fully energy independent.”

Thompson maintained that the commission supports an “all-of-the-above” energy strategy, including natural gas, solar, wind and battery storage.

“With the strain that’s on our grid right now, we need every electron that we can get,” Thompson said.

A test of public accountability

The debate ultimately returned to what voters should expect from the commission.

Hill urged voters to judge the commission by their own utility bills. “Open up your utility bill,” Hill said. “They get the last word.”

Hill offered a simple standard for the next commission.

“I think it’s simply listening,” he said. “Listening to the voters that put us in these positions and making sure that we do right by the voters.”

For Arizona customers facing higher bills, uncertain water supplies and a fast-changing energy economy, the debate presented a clear choice: maintain the current Republican approach, or demand Democratic commissioners who will be present when the public shows up to be heard.