The Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC) voted unanimously to repeal the state’s Renewable Energy Standard and Tariff (REST) rules during its March 4 open meeting, ending a regulatory framework that has governed renewable energy requirements for nearly two decades.
The REST rules, first adopted by the commission in 2006, required regulated electric utilities to obtain a specified portion of their retail electricity sales from renewable resources. The standard began at 1.25 percent in 2006 and increased incrementally until reaching 15 percent after 2024, with a portion of the requirement reserved for distributed resources such as rooftop solar.
According to the commission, the repeal finalizes a rulemaking process that began in January 2024 under the commission’s rulemaking docket RE-00000A-24-0026.
Happening now: The ACC voted unanimously to repeal the Renewable Energy Standard and Tariff (REST) Rules, adopted in 2006. “The Commission took action and made a policy decision that actually eliminates costs, which will result in lower energy bills," said Chair Nick Myers. pic.twitter.com/i4mkHiwlZt
— Arizona Corporation Commission (@CorpCommAZ) March 4, 2026
ACC Chairman Nick Myers joined the other commissioners in the unanimous 5-0 vote. In a statement following the decision, Myers said the mandates were no longer aligned with current conditions in Arizona’s electricity market.
Commission officials said the REST framework achieved its original goal of expanding renewable energy generation in Arizona. The state’s major regulated utilities, Arizona Public Service (APS), Tucson Electric Power (TEP), and UNS Electric (UNSE), have met or exceeded the renewable energy targets established under the rules.
Myers added, “The reality is that the renewable energy landscape in Arizona has changed dramatically in the past 20 years.”
Since the program began, the utilities have collected more than $2.3 billion in REST surcharges from customers to fund renewable programs and incentives, according to the commission. More than $779 million of that amount was distributed as incentives for renewable energy programs approved by the ACC. According to the commission, that amount does not include “above-market amounts paid out to rooftop solar customers under net metering and the current RCP approach.”
— Arizona Corporation Commission (@CorpCommAZ) March 5, 2026
Commissioners also cited long-term power contracts entered into under the mandate as contributing to costs borne by ratepayers. One example highlighted by the commission involves a 30-year solar power agreement between APS and the Solana Generating Station, under which APS customers have paid approximately $274.3 million above market prices for power to date.
“The Solana plant is basically providing energy at 15 cents a kilowatt-hour when the rest of solar these days are around 2 to 2 1/2 cents a kilowatt-hour,” Myers said during the meeting.
Under the REST rules, utilities were required to obtain at least 15 percent of their electricity from renewable sources by 2025, with 30 percent of that renewable requirement coming from distributed sources such as rooftop solar.
Myers said utilities will continue to procure energy resources through competitive procurement processes designed to identify cost-effective and reliable power generation options.
Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes released a statement in September and sent a letter to the commission opposing the repeal. During her tenure on the commission from 2003-2010, Mayes, then holding office as a Republican, participated in the adoption of the REST Rules and Arizona’s Electric Energy Efficiency Standard Rules (EEES Rules).
The Arizona Corporation Commission regulates the state’s investor-owned utilities and has authority over energy policy decisions such as renewable energy standards and utility rate structures.
Energy Secretary Chris Wright says high electricity costs are a political choice in the United States today. The evidence at hand indicates the Secretary isn’t wrong.
“If you have expensive energy in your state…it’s because politicians and regulators chose to do that,” Wright said in a recent interview with the Wall Street Journal. “It is not bad luck, it is not marketplace…there is no reason to have these rapid increases in electricity prices – no reason, but politics.”
This is correct, and the disparity that exists in electricity bills in red states and blue states can be easily seen in a national map published by the U.S. Energy Information Agency (EIA), along with its supporting data.
EIA’s data shows the states with the highest rates include Democratic strongholds like California, New York, Hawaii, and the New England states. Meanwhile, the states with the lowest utility bills include the reddest of red states like Louisiana, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Nebraska, Wyoming, Idaho, North Dakota, and Iowa. This all ties directly in with the findings in a recent study by the Institute for Energy Research that I wrote about in January.
There is no real mystery here: Democrats seek to exploit the “affordability” issue in the upcoming midterm elections, but the truth is their policies created that issue to begin with. In his interview, Wright provides the proof points:
Electricity prices were up 6.7% year over year in December, nearly 40% since 2020. That is due to the United States adopting “UK-style” energy policies under the Biden and Obama presidencies, like forcing coal plant closures and wind/solar mandates.
Utility rates rose two times the rate of inflation in Democrat-governed states over the last five years, in GOP states, only half the inflation rate.
States with Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS) have 50% higher prices than those without; 28 states enforce them, driving costs up.
Biden’s $5 trillion stimulus (for a $1.5T GDP gap) fueled inflation across the board but is now fixable via policy reversals like the ones Wright and other Trump officials are now pursuing.
“We’ve had a tailwind of these things to drive up our own energy prices,” Wright says, “And so that’s a battleship we’re stopping and turning back.”
Turning a policy battleship in the middle of an ocean takes time, but Wright’s efforts produced results during the recent major winter storm. In several regions, coal-fired power plants for which Wright acted to delay scheduled premature retirements generated needed baseload power to avoid blackout conditions as wind and solar failed to perform. Keeping many of those coal plants – and natural gas plants also scheduled for premature retirements under absurd RPS mandates – running will be crucial to maintaining integrity and reliability on grids from coast to coast in the years to come.
The good news for Americans is that this country enjoys an incredible abundance of all the natural resources and raw materials needed to restore sanity and reliability to our power grid. All that’s really needed is the political will to get it done while keeping electricity bills affordable.
Wright and the red states on EIA’s map have shown us the way. That’s true even in Texas, one of the few red states that maintains an RPS of its own. There, policymakers fell asleep at the wheel about the need to maintain a needed fleet of dispatchable reserve capacity, a mistake for which Texans dearly paid during 2021’s Winter Storm Uri.
But, in contrast to their peers in many blue states, Texas policymakers showed a capacity to learn from their mistakes, enacting a series of effective reforms over the last five years that vastly improved grid reliability.
In the recent Winter Storm Fern, the ERCOT-managed Texas grid, which proved to be the national poster child for grid failure in 2021, came through as a shining object lesson on how to fix past mistakes while remaining one of the 10 states with the lowest utility rates.
If you live in a state where power bills are too high, that is a choice your political leaders have made for you to endure. You should factor that reality into your thinking next time those politicians are up for re-election.
David Blackmon is a contributor to The Daily Caller News Foundation, an energy writer, and consultant based in Texas. He spent 40 years in the oil and gas business, where he specialized in public policy and communications.
Arizona’s growing role as a national hub for data centers could be undermined by municipal regulations driven by concerns over water use, electricity demand, and land use, according to a new policy report released by the Goldwater Institute. The report, Data Centers: A Free Market Model for the Digital Future, argues that Arizona’s success in attracting data center investment stems from long-standing policy choices that favor predictable regulation, private property rights, and a stable legal environment.
The authors note that “artificial intelligence has dramatically accelerated these trends. Demand for data has increased exponentially. How communities, businesses, and policymakers respond to this transformation will shape economic competitiveness for decades to come.”
The report also cautions that a rise in local-level restrictions could threaten the state’s competitive position in the digital infrastructure sector.
William Beard, municipal affairs liaison at the Goldwater Institute and a co-author of the report, explained, “Data centers are the physical backbone of cloud computing, artificial intelligence, digital commerce, and national security. They are core infrastructure, no different in principle from transportation networks, energy production, or large-scale agriculture built to meet the demands of a particular era.”
Beard added that Arizona’s emergence as a leader in data center development has already produced economic benefits for the state. “Arizona is thriving as a leader in data centers, the state is reaping the economic benefits, and policymakers must take steps to ensure that continues,” he said.
According to the report, the Greater Phoenix region has become one of the top data center markets in the United States, with capacity projected to exceed 5,000 megawatts—an expansion of more than 500 percent. Goldwater attributes the dramatic growth to regulatory predictability and policies that encourage investment rather than discourage it, as well as “affordable land; reliable energy; and a legal environment anchored in strong private property rights.”
However, the report also warns, “Continued growth is no guarantee, especially as local governments threaten data centers with restrictive policies.”
Citing growing municipal resistance to data center projects, Jen Springman, coalitions manager at the Goldwater Institute and a co-author of the report, said opposition is often rooted in misunderstandings about the impacts of infrastructure.
“Arizona’s advantage is increasingly threatened by a growing municipal-level regulatory backlash, often driven by misconceptions about water use and electricity demand,” Springman said.
Regarding water consumption, Springman said, “Modern data centers are among the most water-efficient industrial facilities ever built.”
The report further challenges claims that data center development is responsible for rising electricity prices. “Electricity prices, meanwhile, are not a data center problem; they are a policy outcome,” Springman said.
She added that misdirecting blame can lead to ineffective policy responses. “Blaming infrastructure for political energy choices obscures the real cause—and produces the wrong solutions,” Springman said.
Goldwater’s report argues that local restrictions do not reduce demand for digital services, but instead risk shifting investment to other states while increasing costs for consumers and businesses.
In a summary of the report’s conclusions posted to X, Goldwater stated, “The question is not whether data centers will exist, but whether Arizona will continue to lead—or retreat in the face of the future.”
State Representatives David Marshall (R-LD7) and Ralph Heap (R-LD10) introduced House Bill 2269, a measure to eliminate the state sales tax on electric and gas utility bills for Arizona residents and businesses.
The proposed legislation would suspend the state’s 5.6% sales tax on electricity and natural gas utilities until either $2.3 billion in cumulative tax relief has been provided to Arizonans or December 31, 2046—whichever comes first.
Once the $2.3 billion threshold is reached, the Legislature would then decide whether to extend, modify, or reinstate the exemption.
“People are getting crushed by rising costs, making it harder to live and do business in our state,” said Representative Marshall. “Almost everyone pays a local utility for electricity or gas. Eliminating the tax on this expense represents one of the most immediate and direct ways we can help working families keep costs affordable.”
The 5.6% tax on electricity and gas quietly adds up on monthly bills, leaving the average household paying more than $100 a year in utility tax—funds that could instead support necessities like groceries, housing, and childcare.
Representative Marshall highlighted a structural concern with the current system: “Taxing electric and gas utilities creates a perverse incentive for the government to support increased rate hikes. If rates go up, the state gets more money. That leads some to view rate increases as a source of potential funds for their liberal pet projects. That’s not right; it’s time to put the people of Arizona first.”
“While we’re unsure of any legal way to get ratepayers’ money back, there are things we can do to help reduce costs today,” Marshall continued. “In my opinion, the next best thing we can do is try to provide justice by eliminating taxes on electric and gas utilities moving forward. That’s why, over the next 20 years, we are proposing no state tax on utilities until every penny of the $2.3 billion that was wrongfully extracted from the Arizona ratepayer is metaphorically ‘paid back’ to hardworking families.”
He added, “This bill will save most residents between $100 and $120 per year, on average. Once the $2.3 billion threshold has been met, then the state can determine what it wants to do with the exemption from there, including whether to reassess the tax or extend the exemption even further.”
Representative Heap pointed to actions taken by the Arizona Corporation Commission as the basis for the bill’s $2.3 billion figure: “In 2006, Arizona Corporation Commissioner Kris Mayes catered to outside special interests and adopted expensive renewable energy surcharges that cost ratepayers more than $2.3 billion over the last 20 years. This special interest slush fund also led to foreign-owned boondoggles like the Solana Generating Station, which Kris Mayes personally supported, and which cost ratepayers more than three times the above-market rate of power.”
“While repealing these mandates may help to prevent new costs,” Heap added, “it will do nothing to compensate customers for the unjust surcharges that Kris Mayes forced ratepayers to pay over the last 20 years.”
Ethan Faverino is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
Our country is facing an energy crisis. No, not because of new demand from data centers or AI. Instead, it’s because utilities in nearly every state, due to government imposed “renewable” mandates, self-imposed mandates, and the supercharging of the Green New Scam under the so-called “Inflation Reduction Act,” have been shutting down vital coal resources and building out almost exclusively intermittent and costly resources like solar, wind, and battery storage.
