Arizona Public Service (APS) is seeking to raise electricity rates by 14% starting in 2026 — a move the Arizona Free Enterprise Club (AZFEC) argues would unfairly burden Arizona families while subsidizing costly “green energy” initiatives and the early closure of a key coal plant.
According to filings with the Arizona Corporation Commission, APS attributes the proposed rate increase largely to battery storage projects and the early retirement of the Cholla Power Plant. The Arizona Free Enterprise Club filed an official response criticizing APS for attempting to block the organization’s intervention in the case, while allowing environmental groups such as the Sierra Club to participate. “APS has no issue letting radical groups like the Sierra Club into their hearings, but they’re trying to block the one organization fighting for Arizona families,” said AZFEC President Scot Mussi.
BREAKING: Arizona Public Service (APS) wants to raise your electricity rates by 14% starting in 2026.
Why? To pay for expensive battery projects and the early closure of the Cholla Power Plant: a plant President Trump directed Energy Secretary Chris Wright to keep online.
Mussi contends APS’s “carbon free” and “carbon neutral” commitments over the past five years have shaped their energy plans — including their Integrated Resource Plans and large-scale renewable energy projects — resulting in higher costs for consumers. “For years, their voluntary commitments have very likely increased costs for Arizona ratepayers,” the organization said in its filing.
Two days after filing its response, the Arizona Free Enterprise Club announced it had been officially granted intervention in the APS case. This designation allows AZFEC to participate directly in proceedings, making it the only organization representing ratepayers who oppose the rate hike.
BREAKING: The Arizona Free Enterprise Club has been granted intervention in APS’s proposed rate hike case!
That means we’re officially in the room, as the only organization standing up for Arizona ratepayers and fighting back against the radical “Green New Scam.”
In the ruling, the Administrative Law Judge overseeing the case described the Club as “the lone proponent” of an energy approach emphasizing reliability, affordability, and independence — priorities the group says align with President Trump’s “American Energy Dominance” agenda.
“While others are lobbying to shut down Arizona’s coal plants and pour billions into unreliable Green New Scam projects, we’re standing up for the ratepayers who will be left to foot the bill,” Mussi said. “We’re proud to be the only organization in this case fighting to keep Arizona’s energy secure, affordable, and free from political interference.”
The Club’s participation ensures that Arizona ratepayers have a voice during the proceedings, according to Mussi and AZFEC Deputy Policy Director Greg Blackie. “This isn’t about politics — it’s about protecting Arizona families and ensuring that our state doesn’t fall victim to the same radical energy policies destroying affordability across the country,” said Blackie. “We intend to shine a light on the real costs, the real numbers, and the real consequences of this so-called green transition.”
The case before the Arizona Corporation Commission will determine whether APS can move forward with its proposed rate hike. The Arizona Free Enterprise Club says it plans to continue pressing for “transparency, accountability, and energy freedom,” ensuring that “ratepayers are not forced to fund reckless green energy policies.”
Jonathan Eberle is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
In the first five months of 2025, solar and wind dominated new U.S. electricity generation. Of the 15 gigawatts (GW) added, solar was 11.5, wind was 2.3, and gas was just 1.3, according to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). Industry voices like Stephanie Bosh of the Solar Energy Industries Association hail this as proof that solar delivers power “faster and cheaper than any other source.” Is this true?
As we accelerate toward a grid increasingly reliant on wind and solar, a closer look reveals a troubling reality: these intermittent sources are driving up electricity costs, not slashing them, through a web of hidden expenses that threaten reliability and affordability.
Solar and wind’s part-time nature is the root issue. Solar generates nothing at night, little in the first and last hours of daylight, and falters under clouds, rain, or snow. Wind generation varies unpredictably. This intermittency doesn’t just displace fossil fuels like natural gas and coal—it forces them into inefficient backup roles.
Calling fossil fuels backups is a misuse of the English language that only serves the wind and solar industrial complex. It’s equivalent to calling the starting pitcher a backup in favor of a pitcher who can only play when the wind blows or the sun shines.
Hydrocarbon, coal and natural gas plants, with fixed costs (capital, maintenance, and employees) comprising 60-75% of operational costs, must raise prices on reduced sales volumes to break even. As renewables flood the market during peak production, they suppress wholesale prices temporarily, where subsidized low-bid renewables set the prices for all. In other grids, they get windfall profits, getting the highest price paid for electricity.
Yet, in the “pay-as-clear” system, evening ramps or scarcity periods spike prices, as expensive peaker plants — needed more frequently for renewable gaps caused by the addition of wind and solar — set the highest price, which is paid to all.
Consider the evidence from high wind and solar regions. California’s residential rates are 30-35 cents/kWh—nearly double the U.S. average of 17 cents — despite 50% wind and solar. Germany’s prices top 36-41 cents/kWh with 55% from wind and solar; Denmark and the UK follow suit at 37 and 29-32 cents, respectively.
These ambitious transitions expose the myth: wholesale dips from renewables are overshadowed by retail hikes from taxes, subsidies, grid upgrades, peakers, and using full-time coal and natural gas part-time.
In California, demand from EVs and data centers exacerbates this, and intermittency demands more peakers. These peaker plants run inefficiently, emit more when ramping up, and charge more because they are only used some of the time, causing costly price spikes. They set the price all generators are paid with the take-and-pay system.
In a grid of only hydro, nuclear, gas, and coal — dispatchable sources—peaker needs plummet. These can load-follow predictably, handling demand peaks without the supply volatility renewables cause. Hydro ramps quickly; nuclear provides steady baseload, natural gas and coal are dispatched to match demand. The system worked and was cost effective.
Pre-renewable grids used peakers sparingly, at 4-10%, versus 20% or more in solar-heavy systems like California, where the solar “duck curve” (charting solar generation creates a graph that looks like a duck, no production at night, the belly of the duck, ramp up during the day, the neck of the duck, with a sharp drop as the sun sets, the downward beak of the duck) requires rapid evening ramps of 10-20 GW.
Adding renewables means building more costly, underutilized peaker plants, inflating bills. Cancelling out much of the CO2 emission reductions that are the stated reason for adding costly disruptive wind and solar.
Transmission costs compound the problem. Wind thrives in remote plains or offshore; solar thrives in distant deserts. Connecting these to cities demands expensive high-voltage lines that cost $1-3 million per mile. Thousands of more miles than are needed for nearby hydrocarbon or nuclear plants.
U.S. estimates peg a price tag of $450 billion by 2035 for renewable integration, adding at least 2 cents/kWh to rates. In Germany, €70 billion in upgrades add 3 cents/kWh. Claims of renewables being “cheaper” rely on levelized cost of electricity (LCOE), ignoring transmission and peaker costs. Solar’s $30-50/MWh jumps 30% or more when transmission and backups are factored in.
FERC projects 84% of 133 GW additions by 2028 will come from wind and solar, making our grids less reliable and more expensive.
Policies like the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which stripped tax subsidies and credits may slow growth, but the trend persists. We need honest accounting. We cannot ignore the wind and solar reality: more blackouts and ever higher prices.
Sandra D. Kennedy, with help and funding from Soros and company, has made it clear that she will bring the Green New Deal to SRP whether customers care or not.
You remember Sandra Kennedy, right? Kennedy tried to pass a Green New Deal regulatory mandate while serving at the Corporation Commission, but it was thankfully defeated by the other Republican Commissioners in 2022. Now, we conservatives need to pay attention again because with the SRP Board elections coming in April, there is a push to flip the board by Sandra Kennedy and her supporters.
Currently, the SRP Board is nearly split between conservatives and Green New Dealers, but the left is pushing hard to flip board members at the SRP election in April. We can’t let that happen.
It is important to understand that SRP does NOT fall under Arizona Corporation Commission jurisdiction, the entity that regulates the other Arizona electric utilities. The Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement and Power District (the District) was officially organized in 1937, formalizing its dual role in managing water resources and providing electricity. This formation was driven by a need to expand the utility’s role in power generation to support the growing population and industries of central Arizona at that time. SRP was formed according to ARS Sec: 48-2301-48-2475, which permits self-governance by a board elected from its members and elections that are completely independent from the regular elections held by city, county, and state.
The next election of Board members (a complex process) will be held April 7, 2026, and all eligible SRP voters must be registered with SRP no later than March 9, 2026. This registration and voting is completely independent of Maricopa County and the Arizona Secretary of State. Maricopa County residents can register to vote here (though you may find that many of you will not be eligible to vote).
Another important point to explore is why all Maricopa County residents who receive electricity from SRP cannot have a vote in who decides on costs of decarbonization, new power plants, and rates to fund these. I have lived in Mesa and Gilbert for the past 45 years and owned 4 houses in that time, but I could only vote in SRP elections at one of the 4 houses, why?
The answer is because the SRP District voting boundaries have never changed since it was incorporated in 1937 even though SRP has expanded service well outside the district’s original boundaries (see here).
The result is that more than 250,000 Maricopa and Pinal County residents have no say in how SRP spends its earnings or sets rates for us customers. This wide swath of Maricopa citizens cannot vote in SRP District elections, and that is just patently unfair!
It is well past time for SRP and the Arizona Legislature to update SRP Governance to include all ratepayers—or give the Corporation Commission the authority to regulate SRP. In the meantime, please do something NOW. Register to vote if you are eligible, and TALK to everyone you know about voting!
David Winstanley is a retired Director of Engineering at Honeywell Aerospace, former Chair of LD15 Republicans, and a conservative activist for local issues in the East Valley.
A Republican lawmaker is taking steps to help Arizona’s power supply during the hot summer months.
This week, Arizona State Senator Frank Carroll announced that SB 1309, which he had sponsored, had been approved by the Committee on Natural Resources, Energy & Water. This bill would “ensure Arizonans have a reliable power supply during the scorching summer months in the desert and the freezing winter months in the high country.”
The bill would require “the Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC) to ensure that any changes made to an electric power grid are capable of producing enough electricity to meet the demand for power in the summer and winter months,” and “a power generation resource mix that avoids both blackouts and brownouts unrelated to severe weather conditions or power quality incidents.”
In a statement that accompanied the announcement, Carroll said, “Because radical Democrats have adopted an extremist environmental agenda, Americans are suffering the consequences during preventable power outages that are endangering lives in the middle of heat waves and dramatic cold spells. Could you imagine if residents in Metro Phoenix experienced a long-lasting power outage when temperatures surge past 110 degrees for days on end?”
Senator Carroll added, “I sponsored SB 1309 to prevent the chaos associated with blackouts, as we’ve seen in states like California, when dangerous green agendas are adopted. We all want a cleaner environment, but not at the potential cost of human life. This commonsense measure will ensure Arizonans’ air conditioners, heaters, lights, and other basic necessities have the power to operate when we need them to.”
On the Arizona Legislature’s Request to Speak System, a representative from the Arizona Free Enterprise Club endorsed the proposal; while representatives from the Climate Cabinet Action, Advanced Energy Economy, Arizona Solar Energy Industries Association, and CHISPA ARIZONA – A Program of League of Conservation Voters, signed into oppose the legislation.
SB 1309 will soon be considered by the full chamber of the Arizona Senate.
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
During a city council meeting this week, Mayor John Giles and the Mesa City Council voted to approve across-the-board increases in the city’s utility rates and fees covering solid waste removal, electricity, gas, water, and wastewater. Over two-dozen Mesa citizens spoke during the meeting, which stretched over two-hours. Mesa, lacking a primary property tax, derives much of its funding from utility rates and fees.
The city is facing increases in electric rates of up to 39% for Winter Tier 2 usage charges for residents and a $2.75 per month service charge increase according to the council report. Non-residential users will face increases from 2-6 percent. Solid waste residential barrel rates will increase 5.5%, with commercial roll-off rates jumping 6.5%. Gas rates are increasing 6-15% for residences and from 9-25% for non-residential users. Water rates are increasing 4-9% for residents, 5.5% for non-residential, 8.5% for commercial users, and 19.5% for large commercial or industrial users. Finally wastewater service and usage components charges will increase by 7.5% for residents and 8.5% for non-residential.
City staffers told The Mesa Tribune that the typical residential bill for water, wastewater, and solid waste will see an increase of about $5.60, from the current average of $100.21 to $105.81
As reported by the Tribune, Giles answered criticism at a meeting in late November telling the frustrated residents, “This proposed water-rate increase of less than 5% in Mesa is dramatically less than you see in every other community,” said Giles, zeroing in on the water utility increase.
“Cities around the Valley are increasing water 25%, talking about increasing wastewater charges 95%. We’re not doing anything remotely like that in the City of Mesa.“
“So if you’re upset about the increasing price of water, I’m with you. But if you want to vent those feelings, probably every other city council in the state would be a more appropriate place to do that because the increases are less than what you’re seeing in other cities.”
Kevin Medema, a Mesa resident who led the organization of a petition opposing the utility increases reportedly signed by 2,000 people, stressed, “We have citizens that are hurting financially. The city shoots for that 20% reserve (in the utility accounts). Well, you know a lot of residents won’t have that in themselves. So, please consider voting ‘no.’’’
Medema suggested that residents have offered to help the city find ways to reduce spending.
During the November 18th meeting, one Mesa resident, Lynda Patrick-Hayes poignantly called upon the council to “entertain the idea of cutting the utility rates and encourage the city manager to eliminate government waste. The City of Mesa has no revenue problems. It has a spending problem.”
Citing the city’s reliance on utility charges and sales tax due to lacking a property tax, Giles told the citizens, “There’s not an apples-to-apples comparison because the City of Mesa has a different model. We’re going to use utilities to help subsidize city services.”
Multiple attempts to reinstate a primary property tax, eliminated in 1945, have failed over the years.
“Now if you don’t like that model…the answer is not to come to the City of Mesa and say, ‘We don’t want you to raise utilities because that’s denying the reality of math.’”
Responding to calls to reduce city spending, Giles told the gathered objectors, “What your proposal is, you’re saying, ‘I want to dramatically cut spending on public safety in the City of Mesa.’ That’s what you’re asking us to do.”
Republican State Representative Barbara Parker spoke on behalf of her constituents in the area and told the council, “They call me when they lose their homes. They call the state when they can’t afford their insurance. And on behalf of them, I am telling you they are hurting and even one dollar makes a huge difference.”
Parker castigated the mayor and council for suggesting the city cut public safety spending, “The fact that we use the threat of fear and emotion that we are going to cut police and fire is so disingenuous and inappropriate. And to all the gentlemen and women in uniform tonight: I am one of you and I have trained many of the firefighters, and I want you to know we have your backs. And we need to elect people who will fund you first and then find funding for everything else. We are never going to cut funding to police and fire. That is always a tactic. It’s disingenuous, it is inappropriate, it lacks accountability, it is intellectually dishonest, and they are not pawns and you deserve better. Don’t let them use you as a pawn police and fire. It’s inappropriate to have a bond and then immediately after that election to suddenly have a tax increase or a rate payers increase.”
She concluded, “One of the things I was able to communicate to the legislature as a member of the Appropriations Committee is that: EVERY. SINGLE. DOLLAR. IS. SACRED. Every single penny is sacred. And when I’ve asked the citizens would they rather have one more penny in their pocket than have it go to waste or redundancies or excesses. Absolutely they say yes. I hope you’ll have the courage to do the right thing tonight. I can tell you on behalf of the state: we were able to cut budget, balance our budget, give money back to the taxpayers and fund every single program. And if the state of Arizona can do it, Mesa can do it better.”
The rate increases were passed by the city council unanimously with Giles stating, “I know all of that is not appreciated by this crowd to the extent that we’d like it to be, but it’s the facts. For those reasons I am compelled by math and the reality of the situation to support this increase.”
