Board of Supervisors Addendum - Regular Meeting

The record shows supervisors Heinz and Scott are not present. All other Board members are present. We do have a quorum.

We'll move to agenda item number two, which is the Pledge of Allegiance and Supervisor Christie has offered to lead us in that.

Would you all please join me in our pledge to our

Thank you. Next item is the land acknowledgment. Belatedly I don't know. I belatedly asked supervisor Conno if he might be willing to read it. I don't know if you have it handy. If you do not, I I I'm happy to. Thank you. Yes.

I do have it. Terrific. Thank you. The tribal land acknowledgment is as follows. On behalf of Pima County residents, we honor the tribal nations who have served as caretakers of this land from time immemorial and respectfully acknowledge the ancestral homelands of the Tana'o O'odham Nation and the multimillennial presence of the Pasquale Yaqui tribe within Pima County. Consistent with Pima County's commitment to diversity and inclusion, we strive toward building equal partner relationships with Arizona's tribal nations. Thank you, Chair Allen.

Thank you. We have a one item agenda today for the special meeting. I can have it kind of set up a little context for it and then move the item for further discussion. So Item number four is number twenty twenty six-twenty five, opposing the rate increase by Tucson Electric Power. So just for a little bit of context on this resolution, Pima County filed to intervene in the TEP rate case before the Arizona Corporation Commission.

Right now, the Corporation Commission is holding evidentiary hearings this week as well as next. So today's special meeting is timely because we have one, it will provide some guidance to our attorneys on some of the finer details of that intervention and the timeliness is that the hearings that are happening are evidentiary hearings. So is best if we are able to kind of get in some of our evidence and be able to participate in cross examination and be on the record during the evidentiary hearing phase. And so that concludes on May 12, which is before our next meeting, so hence the special meeting. So as I think you all know, this rate case was filed before the ink had dried on our decision on the day that we had decided on Project Blue.

And I'll say for our office and perhaps other offices as well, I suspect ours is not unique. One of the call that we get most often from constituents is around utility rates and people struggling to pay their bills. So this is critically important opportunity, I think, for us to be able to respond to some of the basic needs that our constituents and our residents are facing. Madam Chair, just as

a point of order, I'm just wondering, do we not have to make a motion and pass the motion to discuss this as you are?

I was just trying to set up a little context and then I will move the item.

Chair Allen? Supervisor Conno. I'm happy if our colleague from District 4 wants to have a motion and a second as part of the conversation if that is his wish. I'm happy to make the motion or second the motion. Do you have a preference, Supervisor Christie?

No. If the Chair has made the motion and if you're willing to second it, that would be fine.

All right. Motion seconded by Supervisor Kano. Further discussion?

Well, now is the time for discussion, correct?

Yes. And just to note, we introduced the resolution, So that is why I was providing context. The discussion is now open, go right ahead, Supervisor Christine.

Well, feel free to keep on providing context because that was important.

Okay. Well, so the resolution and you'll note that there was an amended resolution that was submitted on April 30. The difference, just to clarify, there was one that was originally submitted. The second version had greater specificity. What it did is it included that we support the State Attorney General's recommendation of a 4% rate increase.

And that is because the Attorney General did a lot of analysis and looking at what is an appropriate rate increase and came up with this approximately 4% number. So we would be then through this resolution backing the Attorney General's findings that 4% is appropriate. There are two other key things I would note about the resolution, the positions that we would be putting forward that we would be opposing the annual rate adjustment mechanism, often used say the ARAM. This would be an annual rate adjustment mechanism that would allow TEP to go back before the ACC, the Arizona Corporation Commission every single year and request rate increases. Those requests won't be discretionary and utilities often like to tout that the ARAM can result in rate reductions as well as increases, but examples of that happening are practically nonexistent.

Nonexistent. The third piece that is important I think within the resolution is that we would be supporting so there's two things that we're opposing and two things that we would be supporting. Opposing the 14% instead going for the 4%, opposing the ARAM and then supporting the percentage based low income assistance program. So TEP's current low income program provides a fixed amount of $20 a month. So the program proposed is in this case would provide a percentage based discount to those earning approximately 200% of the federal poverty level.

So it's a percentage rather than a flat amount. The fourth key component and this is something that we would be supporting is supporting Rider 23 and this is supporting individual metering for mobile home park tenants. So Rider 23 creates a deferred payment program for mobile park tenants who want to convert properties to individually metered systems. So upfront cost would be about 300 to $500 per unit and then fixed per unit monthly cost for ten years thereafter. The benefit to the operators is that ownership and maintenance responsibility of the electrical infrastructure would be done by TEP.

So those are the kind of four big components of it. And I mentioned one of those right around the net metering that is inclusive of the amendment or I think an amendment that I suppose I will make that reflects a submission by the District two office.

Chair Allen, can you say that one more time, please?

So district two submitted a supplemental item. I don't know. I'm holding it as as though that makes it any clearer. They submitted a supplemental item and it has a whereas clause and a therefore be it resolved clause that talks specifically about the the master metering and supporting what's in the rate case. So that is inclusive of those four things that I said are kind of critical of the resolution. Sort of it's based on the assumption that we will amend it and include District two's submission. Does that make sense?

Yes. Is that Chair Allen in the form of a friendly amendment to your original motion and district five and myself as the seconder, I'm in agreement with including the district two's additions to the proposed resolution. Is that okay Mr. Derkowitz?

Thanks very much. Appreciate it, Mr. Mazzakana.

So

the resolution was amended, seconded by Supervisor Kano. All those in favor of the amended version of Resolution twenty twenty six-twenty five.

Chair Allen? Yes. Before we go to a vote, can I have some comments really quick, please? Oh, absolutely. I want to thank you, Chair Allen, for bringing this resolution to the Board's consideration and ensuring that this language and the county's position is made known before the Corporation Commission sets the rates in partnership with Tucson Electric Power.

We have received unprecedented communication over the last several weeks about the proposed 14% increase that Tucson Electric Power is proposing for its cost benefit analysis that they've made. This is what they need based investment that they've made in our community. I'm always going to stay on the side of rate payers and ensuring that we are being good fiscal stewards of people's money and especially our working families. We are living in a tremendously difficult time right now where costs are skyrocketing, especially at the pump and ratepayers with one utility in the entire region really have no ability to be using any other service other than our main utilities. And so this is an opportunity for us to send a strong message that this proposal needs to go down.

We need to be saving the people some money and ultimately with the company that reported over $200,000,000 in profits last year, I believe it's prudent for the county to be on the side of rate payers.

Madam Chair?

Supervisor Christie?

I don't like higher electric bills anymore than I like higher property taxes, especially when there are so many county roads that are still in disrepair. But I don't remember any Attorney General suing Pima County on behalf of property owners, being forced to pay higher property taxes. Taxes. There are a number of initiatives in place now regarding bringing your own energy to such projects that might consume more energies and might, for whatever reason, have an effect on rates. But that initiative is in place at this particular time.

Also, when and Madam Chair, you have criticized CEP for it in the past, when you have a whole retrofitting of coal burning plants being turned into natural gas, that's got to be paid for and that's the cost of the Green New Deal. And we have heard numerous incidents of this whole issue verging upon the fact that in your estimation, Madam Chair, that TEP has been dragging its feet in this retrofitting. And finally, Madam Chair, that there is a process governed by the ACC with public hearings. And I would urge that we let that process be allowed to move forward. And the Attorney General's office has many better projects than involving itself with some utility rate increase.

So I will be voting against this resolution.

Thank you.

Chair Allen. Supervisor Kano. I just wanted to correct the record that the Green New Deal was never passed by the Senate.

Thank you. With that, I think we will go for, bring it to a vote. All those in favor of resolution twenty twenty six dash 25 as amended, say aye. All those opposed?

Opposed.

Resolution passes two-one.

Yes. Before we adjourn, so roll call wasn't captured at the beginning of the meeting. So I just want to add that supervisors Heinz and Scott were not present and all other Board members are present at today's meeting. Thank you. You.