Arizona’s Energy Competitiveness Index was released Friday by the Common Sense Institute of Arizona (CSIA) and despite skyrocketing electrical rates, Arizona’s energy reliability and competitiveness have reportedly fallen since 2022. With businesses and families buckling under the strain of higher rates passed by the Arizona Corporation Commission in March, the state and nation are pivoting further away from reliable natural gas and nuclear power toward more intermittent solar and wind solutions. And the outcome seems to be hurting Arizona families.
According to the report, “Arizona’s relative affordability has improved compared to other states. The state now ranks 21st in residential electric affordability, up from 28th in 2011.” But legislators and regulators shouldn’t celebrate much. This isn’t simply because Arizona has gotten better, but also because almost every other state has gotten much worse.
The CSIA report found in part, “The reliability of energy grids across the country is on the decline, although Arizona remains one of the more reliable grids in the country. On average, a user of electricity in Arizona faced 136.9 minutes of interruption in 2022 – up from 73.9 minutes in 2013, and nearly 59% less than the duration faced by the average customer across the U.S. (333 minutes). Despite falling slightly in the two reliability competitiveness indices, Arizona still ranks 5th in reliability.”
⚡ Despite a national decline, Arizona's energy grid remains one of the most reliable! In 2022, the average Arizonan faced only 136.9 minutes of interruption, compared to the national average of 333 minutes.
— Common Sense Institute Arizona (@CSInstituteAZ) July 29, 2024
However, the report added, “Both the electricity and natural gas prices faced by residential, commercial, and industrial customers in Arizona have increased in the last 13 years, but have also become more competitive as other states experienced larger increases. Arizona now ranks 21st in residential electric affordability, up from 28th in 2011.”
The report shows in detail that since peaking in 2022 at a score of 82.9, Arizona’s competitiveness index has dropped precipitously ending at 79 in 2023.
As noted by the Common Sense Institute: “Arizona’s Energy Competitiveness Index was 77 in 2011, peaked in 2022 at 83, and then declined to 79 in 2023. An increase in the Energy Competitiveness Index is a positive qualitative change – i.e., the state is more competitive as the index approaches one hundred. While the headline index extends through 2023, data for some of the individual component metrics are not available for the entirety of the period covered. For those metrics, we present the results through the latest year of data available.”
In regard to capacity, the report reveals that Arizona’s generating capacity, referred to as “nameplate capacity” increased from 2019 to 2022 but has barely kept pace with population increases and has declined considerably since peaking in 2012. The report noted, “Arizona has experienced a large increase in its population in recent years due to high levels of net migration. Because power plants typically take several years, if not a decade or more to complete, nameplate capacity has not increased as much, thus the decrease in nameplate capacity per 100,000 residents.”
From 2011 to 2023, Arizona's overall energy competitiveness ranking jumped to 21st, with improvements in six out of ten key indices.
— Common Sense Institute Arizona (@CSInstituteAZ) July 26, 2024
The Common Sense Institute offered a stark warning that, “While the goals of implementing a more environmentally friendly energy system have merit, policymakers should take caution not to recklessly transition their energy grids to renewable sources too quickly, and without appropriate supporting infrastructure. Renewable transition elsewhere, namely in states like California and Texas, has proven to be both costly and at a detriment to reliability and competitiveness.“
Should Washington and Phoenix continue to plunge headlong down this path, it seems unlikely that Arizona’s energy outlook will remain sunny.
On June 13, 2024, the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) released a critical report following a nearly three-year investigation into the Phoenix Police Department (PPD), alleging misconduct including excessive force, discrimination, and violations of homeless people’s rights. This report has prompted the DOJ to push the City of Phoenix to sign a consent decree, which would subject the PPD to court-ordered monitoring.
The report has stirred considerable debate among Phoenix city officials and residents. The DOJ’s findings have cast a spotlight on the PPD’s practices, while the proposed consent decree has raised concerns about federal overreach and its potential impact on local law enforcement.
Phoenix City Council members have voiced their concerns about the report and the implications of entering into a consent decree. Councilwoman Ann O’Brien emphasized the DOJ’s poor track record and the high costs associated with such agreements. She pointed to Seattle, where violent crime increased by 37% during its 10-year DOJ monitoring period, and Albuquerque, which saw a 53% rise in violent crime since 2015 under federal oversight.
Closer to home, the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office has incurred nearly $300 million in taxpayer costs since 2015 due to federal monitoring. This undue cost to the taxpayer equates to “defunding the police.”
Consent decrees for police departments began in 1994 with the “Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act,” a legislative response to the nationally publicized police beating of Rodney King. While police brutality is unequivocally unacceptable, there is significant debate over whether federal oversight through consent decrees is the best solution. Critics argue that such measures often lead to increased bureaucracy and hinder effective policing, ultimately harming the communities they aim to protect.
Despite the DOJ’s allegations, the City of Phoenix has taken proactive steps to address issues within its police department. The PPD has implemented significant reforms, including revising use-of-force practices, purchasing body cameras, and adopting a robust accountability program. Additionally, PPD officers are the highest paid in Arizona, a strategy aimed at recruiting and retaining top talent.
The Phoenix mayor and city council, elected by local voters, have demonstrated their accountability to the community through these reforms. They have succeeded in reducing crime while training police officers in modern policing practices. This local control and responsiveness to community needs are seen by many as preferable to federal intervention.
Community support for the PPD is strong. Phoenix residents, who are intimately familiar with their community’s unique needs and challenges, overwhelmingly favor local control over federal oversight. Ronald Reagan’s famous quote, “The most terrifying words in the English language: I’m from the government and I’m here to help,” resonates with many who fear that federal intervention could do more harm than good.
Phoenix has gone out of its way to cooperate with the DOJ, making sweeping reforms on its own. The PPD’s efforts to improve transparency, accountability, and community relations demonstrate a commitment to policing excellence without the need for federal intervention.
The City of Phoenix must now decide whether to voluntarily submit to a consent decree that mandates court-ordered control of the PPD or face the possibility of being taken to federal court by the DOJ. There they will be forced to plead their case to a federal judge.
The debate over the DOJ’s proposed consent decree is not just about police reform; it is also about maintaining local autonomy and ensuring that the residents of Phoenix have a say in how their city is governed. As Phoenix grapples with this issue, the city’s leaders and residents are urging the mayor and council to reject federal overreach and continue striving for safer streets and brighter futures through local control and community-based policing.
As the city moves forward, it remains to be seen whether the DOJ consent decree will be adopted or if Phoenix will be allowed to chart its own course, confident in its ability to manage and reform its police department without outside interference.
Paul Parisi is the Arizona Grassroots Director for Our America.
A federal investigation into the death of a Phoenix Marine Corps veteran published on Wednesday revealed that a Veterans Administration (VA) facility was to blame, due to insufficient and lacking health care practices and policies.
The VA Office of Inspector General (OIG) found that the deceased Marine veteran experienced a delay in basic life support and numerous deficiencies with regard to initiating emergency medical care at Carl T. Hayden Medical Center in Phoenix: conflicting facility policies inconsistent with Veterans Health Administration requirements, lack of layperson CPR training, lack of an automatic external defibrillator, lack of wearable cardioverter defibrillator as ordered, and failure to assess vital signs at an appointment preceding the medical emergency.
The OIG report determined that the facility leaders’ lack of response to treating the veteran was out of alignment with the VA’s high reliability organization (HRO) principals and I CARE values. It further found that the patient safety manager failed to investigate the related patient safety report, therefore resulting in an inaccurate harm assessment. And, the OIG found that both the patient safety manager and facility director failed to ensure a timely review of the report and investigation.
Congressman Ruben Gallego, also a Marine Corps combat veteran, issued a statement in response to the report. Gallego said the VA center investigation revealed the treatment to not only be insufficient, but “disturbing [and] dangerous.”
“The fact that something as simple as vital signs were not taken at the beginning of the appointment is particularly shocking,” said Gallego.
The 55-page report indicated that the veteran’s death may have been preventable, had better policies and procedures been exercised. Upon the veteran collapsing following an outpatient appointment, the facility operator rebuffed a rapid response attempt by a hospitality employee and advised to call VA police instead. The employee then called 911. As a result, the veteran waited 11 minutes prior to paramedics arriving, administering basic life support, and transporting him to a community hospital where the veteran died two days later.
The Phoenix facility’s policy restricted rapid response teams to events inside buildings and relegated all other emergencies to 911 and VA police, regardless of the proximity of the emergency to the building. The hospitality employee who attempted to save the veteran’s life called for a rapid response team due to the emergency’s proximity to the building, in the knowledge that they would arrive faster than the other responders. The OIG in its report expressed concern that the facility had elevated policy above all else, including lifesaving measures.
“The OIG is concerned that facility policy regarding responses to medical emergencies does not align with Veterans Health Administration (VHA) policy to ‘optimize patient safety for those requiring resuscitation’ and ensure ‘emergency response capability to manage cardiac arrests on VHA property,’” read the report.
Even prior to the emergency event, the OIG found that the veteran suffered from apparent deficiencies in medical care, such as the absence of the needed wearable cardioverter defibrillator as ordered by the veteran’s cardiologist, and no health care personnel took complete vital signs as required during the veteran’s outpatient exam.
The OIG issued 10 recommendations to the facility, which involved aligning policies with VA policies and procedures so they no longer conflict.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
On Monday, an Arizona court ruled that government “prevailing wage” mandates for businesses were unlawful.
The Maricopa County Superior Court issued a ruling against the cities of Phoenix and Tucson concerning their prevailing wage ordinances, which required contractors on public works to pay its workers according to city and federal rate determinations. The Department of Labor defines prevailing wage as that average wage paid to similarly employed workers in a specific occupation in that area of intended employment.
The Maricopa County Superior Court agreed that state law (A.R.S. § 34-321(B)) prohibited any city from enacting such prevailing wage ordinances as the cities of Phoenix and Tucson had done in January.
“This Prevailing Wage Statute, by its plain language, prohibits any Arizona political subdivision, such as the City of Phoenix and the City of Tucson, from enacting an ordinance that requires contractors and subcontractors to pay their workers less than the prevailing rate of wages. Nevertheless, both cities did just that on January 9, 2024,” read the ruling.
Phoenix Ordinance G-7217 and Tucson Ordinance No. 12066 required city contractors or subcontractors under a contract with an aggregate value of $4 million or more and $2 million or more, respectively, to pay workers not less than the prevailing wage rate for the same class and kind of work in the Phoenix metropolitan area. Both cities required certain record keeping and instilled penalties for violations including contract rescission, disqualification from future city contracts, and liquidated damages up to three times the wages owed.
Yet, the cities argued that their ordinances were protected under Proposition 202, or the Raise the Minimum Wage for Working Arizonans Act. The cities claimed that the act functioned under the doctrine of implied repeal: since the act and state law were inconsistent, the act took precedence since it came after state law. The superior court rejected that interpretation, since the act itself didn’t address the term prevailing wage, and there remained definable differences between prevailing wage and minimum wage.
“A prevailing wage ordinance is not a minimum wage law, and the Minimum Wage Law did not impliedly repeal the prevailing wage prohibition because the two laws can be harmonized by ‘reasonable construction,'” stated the court. “They have fundamentally different underlying policy goals. Moreover, unlike minimum wage laws, which set a single, across-the-board floor on wages, prevailing wage measures impose a complex, fluctuating schedule of wage standards (determined by federal law and regulation) meant to approximate average wages for specific occupations and localities.”
The Goldwater Institute, in partnership with attorney Robert G. Schaffer, sued Phoenix over its prevailing wage ordinance on behalf of the Associated Minority Contractors of Arizona, the Arizona Chapter of the Associated General Contractors of America, and the Arizona Builders Alliance.
The institute’s vice president for legal affairs, Timothy Sandefur, said in a press release that the ruling protected fairer wages for workers.
“Today’s decision is a victory for Arizona taxpayers — who deserve to have public works projects run as closely as possible to true market conditions, instead of having their costs decreed by politicians in order to benefit their political friends,” said Sandefur. “It’s also a win for workers themselves, who deserve to do work in a competitive environment where wages are based on merit, instead of political dictate.”
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
Last Thursday, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) announced that “the Phoenix Police Department and the City of Phoenix engage in a pattern or practice of conduct that violates the U.S. Constitution and federal law.”
“The Justice Department has concluded there is reasonable cause to believe that the City of Phoenix and the Phoenix Police Department engage in a pattern or practice of conduct that deprives its residents and visitors, including Black, Hispanic, and Native American people, of their rights under the Constitution and federal law,” said Attorney General Merrick B. Garland. “The release of today’s findings report is an important step toward accountability and transparency, and we are committed to working with the City of Phoenix and Phoenix Police Department on meaningful reform that protects the civil rights and safety of Phoenix residents and strengthens police-community trust.”
The DOJ found that:
“PhxPD uses excessive force, including unjustified deadly force and other types of force.
“PhxPD and the City unlawfully detain, cite, and arrest people experiencing homelessness and unlawfully dispose of their belongings. This is the first time the Department has found a pattern or practice of conduct that focuses on the rights of people experiencing homelessness.
“PhxPD discriminates against Black, Hispanic, and Native American people when enforcing the law.
“PhxPD violates the rights of people engaged in protected speech and expression.
“PhxPD and the City discriminate against people with behavioral health disabilities when dispatching calls for assistance and responding to people in crisis.”
In a message to City of Phoenix employees, City Manager Jeff Barton said, “We are taking all allegations seriously and are planning to review this lengthy report with an open mind… Self-reflection is an important step in continuous improvement, and our Police Department has demonstrated a commitment to reform by making improvements to policy, discipline, internal investigations and training.”
The City of Phoenix and Phoenix Police Department are reviewing the findings from a nearly three-year investigation by the U.S. Department of Justice. Read more: https://t.co/tQ8qKeZdHj
— City of Phoenix, AZ (@CityofPhoenixAZ) June 13, 2024
Phoenix Interim Policy Chief Michael Sullivan added, “We want to see not only what these individual incidents are that the Department of Justice refers to, but we also want to see whether it included policy change or whether it possibly included discipline, or other changes within the department as far as practices go.”
According to its press release, the DOJ shared that it had “provided a detailed briefing on the findings to the City and PhxPD on Tuesday and proposed that the parties agree in principle to negotiate expeditiously and in good faith to reach a comprehensive court-enforceable settlement with independent monitoring.”
The Arizona Senate Republicans Caucus was less diplomatic than the City of Phoenix in the aftermath of the release of the report, writing, “The weaponized and radical Department of Justice is at it again, this time targeting our selfless public servants within the Phoenix Police Department who risk their lives everyday. Biden’s corrupt DOJ is out of control and is working against our citizens and our republic. We will always back the blue, our policies will continue to reflect that notion, and we will continue to speak out against the injustices our men and women in law enforcement are subjected to at the hands of the radical left.”
The weaponized and radical Department of Justice is at it again, this time targeting our selfless public servants within the Phoenix Police Department who risk their lives everyday.
Biden’s corrupt DOJ is out of control and is working against our citizens and our republic.
