A coalition of Arizona businesses from across the state released a statement expressing strong support for a newly announced project by Energy Transfer LP. The project will bring an interstate natural gas pipeline into the state from West Texas, constructed, owned, and operated by Transwestern Pipeline Company. It will power Arizona Public Service (APS), Salt River Project (SRP), Tucson Electric Power (TEP), Unisource Energy Services, and other utilities that supply energy to Arizona’s homes and businesses.
The new 42-inch pipeline, kept pressurized by nine compression stations, will span 516 miles across Texas, New Mexico, and Arizona. It will carry 1.5 billion cubic feet per day of natural gas. It is expected to come online in 2029.
🚨 Just announced: A major win for Arizona’s energy and economic future.
We’re proud to stand with 50+ business, industry, and community organizations across the state in support of Transwestern’s new natural gas pipeline—a critical investment to keep Arizona competitive,… pic.twitter.com/iyrdo4qNHs
AZBigMedia reported that the project is expected to cost approximately $5.3 billion, including about $600 million of Allowance for Funds Used During Construction (AFUDC)
“With this new natural gas pipeline, Arizona will be well positioned to have reliable baseload power to meet the growing demands of our economy,” said Arizona Corporation Commissioner Rachel Walden in a statement. “I’m pleased to see that the City of Mesa is participating in this project, serving as an example of Arizona’s ability to attract new commerce with affordable power while innovating in water conservation.”
In a post to X, Commissioner Nick Myers noted that this annoucement came alongside the recent accouncement that APS is rolling back its Biden-era zero-carbon goals. He said, “On the same day it was announced that APS is backing off their Green New Deal style policies, further proof that this commission has not been friendly to those policies, it was announced that Transwestern will be putting in another natural gas pipeline into Arizona. Energy dominance at its best!”
On the same day it was announced that APS is backing off their Green New Deal style policies, further proof that this commission has not been friendly to those policies, it was announced that Transwestern will be putting in another natural gas pipeline into Arizona. Energy…
— Nick Myers – Arizona Corporation Commissioner (@votenickmyers) August 7, 2025
According to the Arizona Chamber of Commerce and Industry, “The project will help ensure that Arizona remains competitive with other high-growth states by providing the reliable, cost-effective energy necessary for economic development and job creation, particularly as energy demand is projected to soar.”
The Chamber added in a press release, “Natural gas is a cornerstone of Arizona’s energy system, generating 45% of the state’s electricity. It plays a critical role in supporting Arizona’s modern electricity grid, helping utilities meet peak demand during extreme summer weather and enabling the deployment of renewable energy resources like solar and wind year-round. Additionally, more than 1.4 million residential, commercial, and industrial customers count on the natural gas distribution system for their home comfort and business needs, including in sectors like semiconductors, EV batteries, and other advanced manufacturing.”
APS director of Resource Integration and Fuels Jill Freret told KJZZ, “This expansion for APS and for some of our peer utilities really allows us to bring in more natural gas to fuel existing facilities with growing demand and position us to have additional gas on our system out into the future.” Freret observed that the energy demand of APS is expected to increase by over 60% in the next 13 years.
The benefits of the project are not limited to the energy industry, however. Patrick Bray, Executive Vice President of Arizona Farm and Ranch Group, explained, “Access to natural gas supply is essential for our farmers and ranchers to power critical operations. This pipeline is a smart investment that will ensure the continued success and competitiveness of Arizona’s agriculture industry, allowing us to produce the food that sustains our communities and contributes significantly to our economy.”
In addition to dozens of Chambers of Commerce across the state, from Flagstaff to Sahuarita, industry organizations including the Arizona Cattle Feeders Association, Arizona Lodging & Tourism Association, Arizona Manufacturers Council, Arizona Multi-housing Association, Arizona Restaurant Association, Arizona Rock Product Association, Arizona Small Business Association, Arizona Trucking Association, and the United Dairymen of Arizona, all expressed support for the pipeline.
During its July 24th Contingency Open Meeting, the Arizona Corporation Commission (AZCC) unanimously assigned the construction cost of a massive 1.5-million-gallon subterranean water tank to the Sedona customers of Arizona Water Company. The decision follows a nearly four-decade efffort to find a location for the water tank that was agreeable with the City of Sedona and local residents.
According to the AZCC, the “extra costs incurred” by the water tank, concealed with a fake home, will fall “solely on the Sedona customers of Arizona Water Company.” However, Pinetop Lakes, Munds Park, and Payson will also see a significant rate increase.
According to a press release from the AZCC, for Sedona residents, the estimated rate increase is 45%, which would bring the average residential bill to approximately $60 per month. Meanwhile, other Northern Group customers will see an increase of roughly 34%, with a billing estimate of $52 per month.
The ACC held a very robust and meticulous discussion w/Arizona Water Company and Community members during Thursday's Meeting about who's responsible for extra costs from aesthetic additions to utility infrastructure. A new underground water tank in Sedona was a top issue. pic.twitter.com/P2FdduMn1U
— Arizona Corporation Commission (@CorpCommAZ) July 24, 2025
Prior to the meeting, the notion of assigning the costs to the ratepayers outside of Sedona was opposed by Republican Arizona Rep. David Marshall (R-LD7), who publicly condemned it in a press release. Marshall cited the “City’s requirement that Arizona Water Company bury a new water storage tank underground and disguise it with a fake home built on top—an aesthetic demand that made the project one of the most expensive the utility has ever undertaken.”
Rep. Marshall stated, “Arizona Water Company’s northern Arizona ratepayers—including the good people of Pinetop-Lakeside, Heber-Overgaard, Rimrock, Munds Park, and the Village of Oak Creek—did not ask for these costly design features. Quite frankly, it’s absurd to ask them to fork over millions to subsidize the excessive, big-government design mandates of a city nearly 200 miles away. This is a matter of fairness and affordability. Sedona chose to inflate the cost of this project for its own benefit. The rest of northern Arizona shouldn’t be stuck footing the bill for Sedona’s multi-million-dollar expectations.”
Rep. David Marshall Condemns Sedona’s Proposed Multi-Million-Dollar Cost Shift to Other Communities’ Ratepayers
“Arizona Water Company’s northern Arizona ratepayers—including the good people of Pinetop-Lakeside, Heber-Overgaard, Rimrock, Munds Park, and the Village of Oak… pic.twitter.com/D2IZhsiPtw
— Arizona House Republicans (@AZHouseGOP) July 23, 2025
According to the AZCC release, an amendment to the decision by Commissioner Rachel Walden resulted in the “non-operational aesthetic expenses” being shifted to Sedona Residents. “My job is to ensure expenses are just, reasonable, and prudent,” Walden said. “That is why I offered my amendment to ensure that non-operational aesthetic expenses will not be paid for by those who do not benefit from them. I thank my fellow Commissioners for fully supporting my amendment.”
The Corporation Commission said in a statement, “The Commission deemed a new tank was prudent and appropriate; however, it was adamant that the extra costs from the aesthetic requirements were not to be assigned to the other 15,000 customers who do not reside in Sedona. The City and residents expressed disapproval for construction of an above ground water tank, which is the conventional design. The Sedona Project is one of only three water tanks that have been undergrounded in the state, by Commission regulated companies.“
The construction tab for the East Sedona Water Storage Tank and Booster Project came to approximately $20 million, as reported by the Arizona Daily Independent. The Arizona Water Company explained that to obtain approval for a conditional use permit (CUP) by the Sedona Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council, it was required to comply with requirements to bury the storage tank and “camouflage” the tank by building a structure on top of the tank that resembles a home for aesthetic purposes, so that it will blend in with the neighborhood and scenery.
“Hopefully this is a strong signal to all water companies, local governments, and residents moving forward that if you require special conditions or place limitations on infrastructure based upon aesthetic preferences, you may be responsible for those extra costs,” said Chair Thompson. “I’m sympathetic to the majority of the Sedona customers who will be solely responsible for these added costs, but it is not an equitable requirement for the 15,000 customers in other communities to be responsible for millions in extra costs because a vocal minority didn’t like the way a water tank looked.”
“After a robust discussion today, the Commission reached a Decision in Arizona Water Co.’s Northern Group’s rate case that strikes a fine balance between ratepayer protections and company viability,” Commissioner René Lopez said. “Thursday’s Decision also signals to ratepayers and local governments that, even in a consolidated group, the Commission will equitably allocate costs to certain customer groups when extraordinary expenses are incurred at their request or for their exclusive benefit. Nevertheless, the compromises and decisions made ensures ratepayers continue to have access to reliable and safe drinking water in some of Arizona’s most beautiful terrains.”
“The final determination of rates for Arizona Water came after a very thoughtful discussion at the Commission about the additional requirements by the City of Sedona for the undergrounding of the water tank and the appropriateness of the financial burden on other ratepayers within their northern division,” stated Commissioner Lea Márquez Peterson, who voted in support of the amended case. “I am appreciative of my fellow Commissioners’ support for my amendment that requires the company to present possible improvements to their customer assistance programs within their next rate case.”
“I’m pleased the Commission directed Arizona Water to engage in discussions with the City of Sedona about funds to help cover the incremental costs to bury the East Sedona Storage Tank,” Vice Chair Nick Myers added. “Because the City required and is directly benefitting from undergrounding the tank, it’s only fair that they contribute financially to cover the City-imposed aesthetic costs. Otherwise, the entire incremental cost of burying the tank will be borne by Arizona Water’s Sedona System customers.”
Mesa Public Schools (MPS) won’t allow military stoles to be worn by graduating students this year.
According to information provided by board membership, MPS defended the rule as a means of honoring their desire to maintain uniformity during graduation ceremonies. MPS policy does not explicitly bar military stoles from being worn, but it does not make an allowance for them, either.
However, MPS policy does allow students eligible to belong to or belonging to a federally recognized Native American tribe to wear traditional tribe regalia or “objects of cultural significance” at their graduation ceremony. The policy noted regalia could include eagle feathers or eagle plumes.
Additionally, students may wear pins or other “small symbol[s]” denoting their accolades related to scholastic or academic honors. These little accolades were allowed to be from “a city, county, state, or tribal government or its representative,” so long as they wouldn’t “detract from the unity achieved by graduates” uniformed in a common cap and gown. The district also drew the line at decorating caps and tassels, unless given permission by their school’s principal.
Governing Board member Rachel Walden opposed the policy and pledged to request Board President Courtney Davis to agendize graduation policy for amending.
“Military students at Mesa Public Schools must be allowed to wear their Military stole at graduation! Yet, students are forbidden to wear this symbol of commitment and achievement for their high school graduation. The community went through this last year and was able to get the ban lifted, yet here we are again,” said Walden. “I’m disappointed that this even needs to be said. To quote our enlisted National Guard student, not wearing the stole ‘disregards the values of honor and achievement that our school purports to uphold.’ There is also a link to his petition in the comments.”
Military students at Mesa Public Schools must be allowed to wear their Military stole at graduation! Yet, students are forbidden to wear this symbol of commitment and achievement for their high school graduation. The community went through this last year and was able to get the… pic.twitter.com/fcmbiHbxhy
As of this report, the petition to allow military stoles at Mesa graduations has reached 250 signatures. The student who launched the petition, Daniela Rascon-Rivas, is a student at Mesa High School and a National Guard member. Rascon-Rivas is also petitioning for the allowance of her to wear cords denoting her accomplishments through the East Valley Institute of Technology (EVIT), a trade school in the area.
According to Walden, last year Red Mountain High School attempted to bar military stoles from their list of allowable graduation attire. Walden advised the board was able to overturn that policy.
The district’s policy on the display of military-related accolades caught the attention of state leaders.
Congressional candidate and former Arizona House Speaker Travis Grantham said allowing graduates to wear their military stoles was a “no brainer.” Grantham is a lieutenant colonel and commander within the Arizona Air National Guard.
“Hopefully the district does the right thing and changes their policy ASAP!” said Grantham.
👇🏻This is a “no brainer” and Mesa Public Schools should let these students wear their military stole. Hopefully the district does the right thing and changes their policy ASAP! https://t.co/gVWmsZDEaN
It was just about 2 years ago that a fury ran through the Mesa Public Schools community over a controversial document that had gone largely unnoticed. That document is titled “Support Plan for Transgender and Gender Nonconforming Students” (also called “Guidelines for Support of Transgender and Gender Nonconforming Students.”) This plan allows a student who “consistently asserts at school a gender identity that is different from the student’s sex assigned at birth” to “participate in such activities and access such facilities consistent with their gender identity.” (Notice there’s no mention of a parental consent requirement.) This means restrooms, locker rooms, and showers.
There were multiple concerns raised to district leadership regarding the plan. How would non-transgender students be protected and affirmed when someone of the opposite biological sex is now allowed to enter their private spaces such as bathrooms, locker rooms, and showers?
Numerous stories surfaced reporting females were not eating or drinking during the day to avoid having to use the restrooms, which they were now compelled to share with biological boys. Why was their “safe space” suddenly being violated? Why were they suddenly denied any expectation of privacy that matched their values? Why is there allowance in the document for the district to conceal a student’s transgender ideation and the district’s course of action affirming that ideation from their parents? Does this concealment violate ARS 1-601, Parents Rights Protected? Does this plan amount to providing behavioral health services as defined by the Arizona Behavioral Health Board? District leadership has successfully danced around providing clear, unambiguous answers to these questions. Why? What are they trying to hide from parents?
Even though Superintendent Dr. Andi Fourlis issued carefully worded, yet vague assurances to the contrary, there still remains within the plan/guidelines, allowances to NOT notify parents of their child’s transgender ideations as the district personnel provide “gender affirming care” for the child. A Public Records Request in early 2023 exposed a school counselor who was maintaining a spreadsheet of trans students along with notation as to whether parents knew.
This counselor was informing other staff how to avoid “outing” students to parents when speaking with them. The plan originally included a checkbox for the student to indicate if their parents were to be told.
Additionally, the plan expressly states that although changes to the student’s “preferred name/pronouns” may be made in district records, “parental consent is not required.”
At the governing board meeting on May 9, 2023, (begin at 3:35:25), board member Rachel Walden asked leadership, “What is the criteria for a student to be put on this Transgender Support Plan?”
District general counsel, Kasey King, responded “…there’s not specific criteria. It’s a student who’s requesting to use the restroom of their choice or to designate the pronouns or names of their choice. Also, as a tool to help the student and the school process how that information is going to be shared, IF AT ALL!”
It is student-initiated, primarily. Notice the complete absence of any parental involvement or even notification here.
Mrs. King continued, “I’m thinking at the younger grades, it might be a situation where the student simply starts asking for some accommodations. And as a way to make sure everybody is on the same page, their teacher or counselor might suggest they put it into writing.”
Are you following this? A student at the “younger grades” might ask for transgender accommodations from the school, and the teacher or counselor will suggest putting that student on a Transgender Support Plan! No parental consent or notification required. Mrs. Walden continued to press for transparency into what is occurring: “There’s nothing in these guidelines about notifying the parents. Isn’t there an opportunity for parental notification process in this?”
Mrs. King: “Parents always have the right under FERPA (Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act) to inspect and review their child’s education records.”
Mrs. Walden responded, “How would they know to ask that?”
Then-board President Marcie Hutchinson chimed in, “I guess they would ‘check in’ with the school.”
So, moms and dads, the only way to know for sure if your child has been placed on a Transgender Support Plan at Mesa Public Schools is for you to “check in with the school.” Since you don’t know the day that this might happen, I suggest you “check in” every day. Don’t expect to be notified otherwise. This is akin to child abuse in many people’s minds, yet the district refuses to make suitable provisions for parental notification, even to this day.
There is, in the old version of the plan/guidelines, a provision for parental notification “if changes are made in Synergy.” But apparently otherwise, mum’s the word.
OLD VERSION
The district has since revised the wording to make sure staff inform students “…that IF they request to change information in Synergy, parent(s) will be notified.”
When I see this, I read “SHHHH! Nobody has to know. Just don’t request a change in Synergy, and it’ll be our secret.”
The other concerning change explicitly states that parental/legal guardian consent “is not required” for a student to request district personnel provide gender affirming care to them.
These changes occurred in July 2024.
NEW VERSION
In a further assault on parental rights, the district has modified the guidelines from the verbiage previously, which stated, “Disclosing confidential student information to others may violate privacy laws” to a more intimidating and yet ambiguous, “Disclosing confidential student information to…parents…may violate privacy laws.”
Are teachers or counselors more likely or less likely to notify parents with this threat of violating privacy laws looming over their heads? I say less likely.
OLD VERSION
NEW VERSION
Then, as if that is not sufficient means for the district to usurp parental authority, Dr. Fourlis and Kacey King have now decided that the transgender plan/guidelines, which have for years resided on the Legal Services webpage on the district website, should be moved to a private internal location, away from public/parent access. When I asked the Governing Board President, Courtney Davis, why the district would make such a move as to lessen transparency, her answer allayed no concerns. “It was moved because it is a tool for school personnel to use to work with transgender students.”
It was always that Mrs. Davis! The only difference is, the public, and more importantly parents, no longer have access to documents describing what could potentially be happening to their child at Mesa Public Schools without their knowledge or consent.
After calling them out on this, Dr. Fourlis and Mrs. King have restored the document to the website, with an interesting change in title. They went from “Guidelines” to “Guidance.” Why that subtle change? For the record, contrary to the wording of Dr. Fourlis’ email, I did not request anything. I simply noted that hiding the document from public view was a “terrible decision.” Apparently, she agreed.
Interesting to note, since this document is considered a “guideline,” or now “guidance” and not a policy, it has not gone before the governing board for approval.
In an attempt to restore parental rights as defined under ARS 1-601, board member Sharon Benson proposed a policy at the April 8, 2025 board meeting which would require parental notification anytime a student indicated to a district employee any transgender ideations. During public comment (starts at 1:59:30), dozens of trans activists showed up in protest. Their overarching message was along the lines of, “If you ‘out’ students, they will be victims of abuse from their parents,” and “School personnel are much better equipped to deal with these issues than parents,” and “It’s not necessary for parents to know about their child’s mental distress.” All patently false statements.
Now, self-proclaimed members of the Communist and Socialist parties weighed in, trying to advance the narrative that children belong to the state, not parents (i.e. parents have no need to know about their child’s mental or emotional distress because the school is taking care of it). This is happening in Mesa folks! Are you paying attention?
It’s time to get involved. Attend district governing board meetings and make your voice heard. It’s critical that we stand for students and for parents.
Ed Steele is a husband, father, grandfather, and Mesa resident with a passion for helping the younger generation succeed in education.
The Arizona Corporation Commission is now entirely under Republican leadership.
On Monday, Lea Márquez Peterson, Rachel Walden, and Rene Lopez were sworn into office at the Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC), giving Republicans control of all five positions on the state agency. Peterson returned to office, while Walden and Lopez entered this position for the first time.
The ACC welcomes back Commissioner Lea Márquez Peterson, and introduces two news Commissioners – Rachel Walden & Rene Lopez. The new Commission voted unanimously to appoint Comm. Kevin Thompson as its new Chair, and Comm. Nick Myers as Vice Chair. https://t.co/mSTRoh9M04pic.twitter.com/58l2R7IYfV
— Arizona Corporation Commission (@CorpCommAZ) January 7, 2025
During the inaugural meeting of the new year, first-term Commissioner Kevin Thompson was voted as chairman of the ACC. Nick Myers became (what appears to be) the first-ever vice chair of the ACC.
In an exclusive comment to AZ Free News, Thompson said, “During our campaign, Commissioner Myers and I often spoke on the trail about our objectives once elected. We expected it to take our full four-year term, but instead we accomplished our goals within the first two years of office.”
Thompson added, “Looking forward to serving as Chairman, I’m confident we will be able to build upon our recent successes with this talented and motivated group of Commissioners. As Chair, my focus is going to be on ensuring our collective efforts are always pushing Arizona forward, making the Commission more efficient and responsive to the public, and never losing sight of our duties to ratepayers and the trust voters have placed in us.”
Peterson posted to her X account about her first day of this new term of office, saying, “I am honored to serving a second term at the Arizona Corporation Commission! Thank you to Chief Justice Timmer for conducting my oath of office. I’m looking forward to serving with Nick Myers, Kevin Thompson, Rachel Walden, and Rene Lopez!
Nick Myers said, “As best we can tell, the Arizona Corporation Commission has never had a Vice-Chairman position. Today we made history… Again. After I nominated Commissioner Kevin Thompson as the new chairman, he nominated me as the very first Vice-Chairman!”
As best we can tell, the @CorpCommAZ has never had a Vice-Chairman position. Today we made history… Again. After I nominated Commissioner @VoteKThompson as the new chairman, he nominated me as the very first Vice-Chairman! pic.twitter.com/wkseub8oKN
— Nick Myers – Arizona Corporation Commissioner (@votenickmyers) January 7, 2025
Rachel Walden wrote, “It’s official! Thank you to the Commission staff for organizing today’s swearing in ceremony and agenda. Thank you to my friends and family for attending! And a massive thank you, Arizona! It’s an honor to go to work for you.”
It's official! Thank you to the Commission staff for organizing today's swearing in ceremony and agenda. This is one of my favorite photos from today. @elvicentela Thank you to my friends and family for attending! And a massive thank you, Arizona! It's an honor to go to work for… pic.twitter.com/DQFTXnld90
All five commissioners are excited about their upcoming work at the ACC over the next two years – even in a divided state government with a Democrat as Governor and Republicans maintaining control of the Arizona Legislature. In his remarks following his unanimous election as chairman of the ACC, Thompson said, “I want to continue to support this Agency and build upon a culture of success and further ensure the Commission is a place the brightest and best want to work. Where we can all be excited to step foot in this building and be proud of what we do to ensure Arizona remains a great place for our children and grandchildren and businesses for decades to come.”
Daniel Stefanski is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
