Arizona regulator can seek utility documents

And a majority cannot block it.

The state Supreme Courtroom in a ruling Wednesday rejected arguments by Arizona Public Service that Bob Burns, who was a member of the Arizona Company Fee, had no impartial proper to demand a glance their company books to seek out out in regards to the cash it has spent — and will spend sooner or later — to elect candidates of its selection.

Attorneys for the utility didn’t dispute that regulators do have the ability to subpoena firm information.

However they argued that energy belongs to the fee as a complete. And so they stated the truth that Burns couldn’t get a majority of the five-member panel to go alongside, left him powerless to behave on his personal.

Not so, stated Justice Clint Bolick writing for a majority of the state excessive court docket.

The choice of the justices can have no instant impact. That is as a result of Burns has since left the panel and the APS fee case that was pending on the time has been determined.

And Bolick stated the court docket was not looking for to resolve all potential future problems with fee procedures.

However the ruling might change how the panel operates, giving future commissioners extra impartial license to probe the actions of regulated utilities.

APS filed for a fee hike in 2016.

Burns issued subpoenas to each APS and guardian firm Pinnacle West Capital Corp. looking for info on all the things from charitable and advertising bills to political donations.

Amongst what he was looking for is to find out if APS was the supply of cash spent in 2014 by “darkish cash” teams to assist elect Republicans Tom Forese and Doug Little to the fee. Arizona regulation permits these teams to protect the supply of their funds from public disclosure.

When the corporate refused, he requested the opposite commissioners — together with Forese and Little — to implement the subpoenas in addition to to require a listening to officer to name witnesses for him to query. The others refused, saying the data sought was irrelevant to the speed case.

Burns then went to court docket.

Bolick identified Arizona Structure vests particular person commissioners with particular powers. The best way APS would learn it, stated Bolick, would “subordinate that proper to the unreviewable determinations of different commissioners.”

And Bolick stated what makes that unacceptable is that Burns was attempting to find out whether or not any of the opposite commissioners, had they acquired APS money that was not publicly disclosed, had been biased in favor of granting the corporate’s request for a fee hike.

“Burns’ allegations display how untenable such a development is, whereby a commissioner’s investigation into attainable improprieties regarding his colleagues might be squelched by the very topics of the investigation,” Bolick wrote.

It later turned out that the corporate had, in truth, put $10.7 million into the 2014 race to elect Little and Forese, funneling the money by darkish cash teams. However that did not get revealed till 2019.

In lastly releasing knowledge on its 2014 spending on the fee race, APS additionally admitted at the moment that it offered $50,000 to the Republican Governors Affiliation which helped the primary election of Gov. Doug Ducey, and $425,000 to the Republican Lawyer Generals Affiliation which, in flip, purchased commercials to elect Republican Mark Brnovich.

Jeff Guldner, who took over the reins of APS in 2019, advised regulators on the time that the corporate wouldn’t fund future candidates working for the fee.

The promise stays in place, a spokeswoman for the corporate stated Tuesday. Aside from that, Jill Hanks stated APS was reviewing the ruling and had no remark.