Town of Chino Valley
Development Services
1982 Voss Drive
Chino Valley, AZ 86323
 
RE: Request to Amend the Town of Chino Valley Unified Development Ordinance, Chapter 154, to address Renewable Energy within Town limits on the September 2, 2025 Planning and Zoning Commission agenda as D.1.
 
Council, Commissioners, and Staff,
 
The Arizona Solar Energy Industries Association (AriSEIA) wrote to you regarding your pending solar ordinance in December 2024 and appeared at your March 2025 Council meeting on this topic. We have reviewed the moratorium on all utility scale renewable energy and battery storage. We strongly recommend against adoption as it is illegal and exposes the Town to unnecessary liability. It will also contribute to increasing electricity prices and decreased grid reliability, as well as the erosion of private property rights within the Town.
 
Proposed Moratorium is Illegal
 
This very issue came up recently at an Apache County Planning and Zoning work session on August 26, 2025. At that meeting, the Assistant County Attorney explained that the jurisdiction cannot just prohibit a land use. There must be a compelling reason and viewshed and loss of tourism are not compelling reasons to eliminate personal property rights.
 
Arizona Revised Statutes (ARS) 9-463.06 specifically limits a city’s ability to adopt a moratorium on land development absent a justification based on a compelling need, demonstrated with reasonably available information. The Town has done no such thing. Indeed, Town Staff prepared an entirely different ordinance (2025-949), which you completely rejected and then upon a rushed and spontaneous vote at the end of a multi-hour meeting, directed Staff to simply draft an ordinance “prohibiting any additional utility-scale solar facilities, including BESS storage, CSP, and wind within the Town of Chino Valley limits.” The Town’s own recitation of your July and August study sessions includes no findings sufficient to satisfy Arizona law.
 
Further, there is no compelling need for the moratorium. The information presented in the various public meetings was entirely based on misinformation spread by renewable energy detractors, not science or economics or existing land use law.
 
ARS 41-194.01 allows any member of the legislature to request that the Arizona Attorney General investigate “any ordinance, regulation, order or other official action adopted or taken by the governing body of a county, city or town… that the member alleges violates state law.” If the Attorney General concludes that a violation has occurred, the Town has 30 days to cure the violation or the state treasurer “shall withhold and redistribute state shared monies from the county, city or town.” According to the League of Arizona Cities and Towns, the state shared revenues for Chino Valley are approximately $7.5 million.[1]
 
As a result of Prop 207, ARS 12-1134 states that “if existing rights to use, divide, sell or possess private real property are reduced by the enactment or applicability of any land use law enacted after the date the property is transferred to the owner and such action reduces the fair market value of the property the owner is entitled to just compensation from this state or the political subdivision of the state that enacted the land use law.” The Town would effectively be eliminating the ability of any property owner in Chino Valley to sell or lease their own private property for the purposes of utility scale renewables development. Therefore, the Town would be liable for reparations.
 
Proposed Moratorium will Contribute to Increased Electricity Prices
 
Electricity prices are rising at twice the rate of inflation.[2] They will continue to increase as long as demand outpaces supply. This is the law of supply and demand. Renewables are the cheapest electricity resources[3] and the fastest to build.[4] Local jurisdictions impeding the development of the least cost and easiest to deploy resources will contribute to increasing costs.
 
Proposed Moratorium will Contribute to Decreased Grid Reliability
 
There is currently a 5-7 year wait for new gas turbines nationwide.[5] Arizona has no existing gas pipeline capacity and a new gas pipeline will not be available until at least 2029.[6] New nuclear will not be available in Arizona until the 2040s.[7] Therefore, the only resources that can be built to meet increased demand now are solar, wind, and storage. The utilities all set new peak demand records this summer.[8] Further, a diverse resource mix and geographic diversity of those resources are essential for grid reliability because an outage in one area likely will not impact an outage in another part of the state, such as a storm.
  
Conclusion
AriSEIA asks you to vote NO on the 2025 Amendments to Chino Valley Town Code Chapter 154 Regarding Renewable Energy: Utility Scale Solar and Wind. This text amendment is a moratorium on all utility scale solar, wind, and battery storage in the Town and is illegal.
 
Respectfully,
Autumn Johnson
Executive Director
AriSEIA 
(520) 240-4757
[email protected]

[1] AZ League Data Portal, State Shared Revenues – Final FY 2026 Budget Estimates, June 3, 2025, available here https://azleaguedata.org/state-shared-revenues-final-fy26-budget-estimates/?utm.

[2] National Public Radio, Electricity Prices are Climbing More than Twice as Fast as Inflation, August 16, 2025, available here https://www.npr.org/2025/08/16/nx-s1-5502671/electricity-bill-high-inflation-ai.

[3] Lazard, Levelized Cost of Energy, June 2025, available here https://www.lazard.com/news-announcements/lazard-releases-2025-levelized-cost-of-energyplus-report-pr/.

[4] Solar Energy Industries Association, We Need Solar and Energy Storage to Address the Energy Emergency, February 4, 2025, available here https://seia.org/blog/we-need-solar-and-storage-to-address-the-energy-emergency/.

[5] S&P Global, US Gas-Fired Turbine Wait Times as Much as Seven Years; Costs Up Sharply, May 20, 2025, available here https://www.spglobal.com/commodity-insights/en/news-research/latest-news/electric-power/052025-us-gas-fired-turbine-wait-times-as-much-as-seven-years-costs-up-sharply.

[6] Salt River Project, Arizona Utilities Work to Lock in Critical Natural Gas Delivery to Power Growth, August 6, 2025, available here https://media.srpnet.com/arizona-utilities-work-to-lock-in-critical-natural-gas-delivery-to-power-growth/.

[7] Apache County Planning and Zoning Commission work session, August 26, 2025.

[8] Utility Dive, 3 Arizona Utilities Set Peak Demand Records, August 12, 2025, available here https://www.utilitydive.com/news/arizona-aps-tep-srp-peak-demand-record/757395/. 

AriSEIA filed a neutral response to the Trico settlement agreement. AriSEIA is neutral on the settlement because:

• Trico agreed to a 6 month phase in to DG solar changes
• Trico has other dockets pending to create important virtual power plant (VPP) and time of use (TOU) programs
• Trico preserved grandfathering for net-metered customers
• Trico agrees that the avoided cost is the floor for any solar export rates
• Trico is already at avoided cost so a 10 year lock-in no longer makes sense for solar customers

AriSEIA filed surrebuttal testimony in the Sulphur Springs (SSVEC) rate case, We oppose the settlement agreement entered into between the Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC) and SSVEC and continue to make the following recommendations:

• Reject SSVEC’s proposal to eliminate net metering for all non-residential systems, entirely. SSVEC’s proposal is not justified and disproportionately impacts a relatively small number of customers.
• Approve the elimination of the DG meter fee.
• Reject SSVEC’s proposal to eliminate the 10-year export lock for DG systems.

If the Commission adopts the proposed settlement, The Commission should make the following modifications:

• Freeze net metering for all non-residential members effective 6 months after the date of a decision in this docket.
• Allow grandfathering for all non-residential net metering members for 20 years from the system installation date.
• Establish SSVEC’s avoided cost as the floor for the Distributed Generation Export Energy (“DGEE”) Rate.
• Maintain the 10-year export rate lock for all customers. The settlement agreement is at odds with Staff’s position on the same issue in Docket No. AHD-00000J-23-0273.
  
• Direct the Company to develop and file with the Commission within 12 months of the decision, a pilot battery energy storage demand response proposal and critical peak tariff substantially similar to Trico Electric Cooperative’s applications in Docket Nos. E-01461A-24-0122 and E-01461A-23-0271, respectively.

The Arizona Corporation Commission is updating their practice and procedure rules that govern how the Commission conducts itself in rulemakings and adjudicated cases. These rules cover everything from transcripts to public comments to ex parte to how to ask for a rehearing or file a complaint against a utility. You can read AriSEIA's detailed comments at the link above.

Arizona Corporation Commission
1200 W. Washington Street
Phoenix, AZ 85007

RE: Rulemaking (RE-00000A-24-0026) — Proposed Modifications to the Renewable Energy Standard and Tariff (REST) Rules

Chairman and Commissioners,

Vote Solar, the Arizona Solar Energy Industries Association (“AriSEIA”), and Solar United Neighbors appreciate the opportunity to provide comments regarding modifications to Arizona Administrative Code (“A.A.C.”) Title 14, Chapter 2, Article 18 (the “REST Rules”). The REST Rules have provided a framework for investment in Arizona’s energy economy for nearly 20 years. Any changes to the REST rules will have broad and profound implications for affordability, economic development, and clean energy investments in Arizona.

Background
The REST has long served as the foundational policy framework guiding clean energy development and investment in Arizona. Implemented by a  majority republican Commission in 2006, the REST established a target for utilities to source 15% of their electricity from renewables by 2025. Bipartisan support for the clear and incremental goals established in the REST rules supported a stable, pro-business environment that has attracted billions in investment, created jobs, and positioned Arizona as a leader in the solar economy. Arizona now ranks 4th in the nation for total solar capacity and 6th in the nation for solar employment, with over 9,700 jobs in the sector.[1]
State energy goals have evolved in the years since the REST was created. Today, 36 states have established clean and renewable standards or goals and 21 states have set target dates for reaching 100% clean energy.[2] As the technology supporting an affordable and reliable transition to clean energy has advanced, state goals have adapted: 12 states now have established energy storage targets.[3] Given Arizona’s considerable progress towards a clean electric grid, it is worthwhile to revisit the REST Rules and evaluate whether changes are warranted to ensure it addresses the challenges that Arizona’s residents, businesses, and utilities face today and remains relevant and useful into the future. However, a wholesale repeal of the REST Rules, as proposed in Staff’s July 31, 2025 Memorandum, will destabilize Arizona’s energy economy and have profound impacts on consumers and businesses across the state. We urge the Commission not to abdicate its responsibility for charting a course towards an affordable, reliable, and clean energy future for Arizona by repealing the REST Rules.

Cost and Affordability
Renewable energy is now the cheapest generation resource available. Solar and wind generation are less expensive than building new fossil fuel plants, but Arizona utilities plan to continue investing in gas plants and running outdated coal plants that lock customers into higher costs for decades. Even when solar is unsubsidized it is the most cost competitive for of electricity generation. Solar is the least cost AND fastest to deploy resource.[4] The levelized cost of a solar plant in Arizona is less than the cost of a new gas plant, in part because solar energy generation has no fuel costs and minimal ongoing operations and maintenance costs. The investments made to meet the REST goals benefit consumers by protecting them from the volatile cost of fossil fuels, especially in recent years, and stabilizing energy prices. Ratepayers have reaped the benefits: according to a 2024 Strategen study, the REST delivered over $1.5 billion in net benefits to the public and more than $469 million in savings to APS and TEP customers.[5]

Press releases and public statements issued by the Commission, such as vote explanations at the February 6, 2024 Open Meeting, include inaccurate or unsubstantiated claims about ratepayer costs from the REST.[6] When evaluating the costs and benefits to ratepayers, it is important to consider not only the capital cost of energy resources built to achieve the REST standards, but also the alternative cost of non-renewable resources that would have been built absent the REST Rules and the long-term savings to ratepayers from the development of renewable energy resources that have no ongoing fuel costs. A fair and balanced analysis must also consider the benefits associated with the lessened health and environmental impacts of renewable resources, which produce no pollution. Without this context, statements about the cost of the REST are meaningless.

State Economic Impacts
The REST Rules created a stable, pro-business environment that has made Arizona a destination for clean energy investment, yielding decades of economic benefits across the state. Renewable energy projects generate substantial lease income, tax revenue and job creation, often in rural communities. For example, a single 200 MW solar + 200 MW storage project in Maricopa County is estimated to yield $26.2 million in tax revenue and $349.7 million in economic activity. A similar project in Yuma County is projected to generate $25.8 million in taxes and $213.4 million in economic benefits, including hundreds of local jobs.[7]

The REST Rules have also provided ancillary economic benefits as businesses that invest in and rely on the clean energy technologies of the future chose to locate in Arizona. According to an analysis by the Western Way, 11 manufacturing and facility expansion projects in the clean energy sector brought $6.1 billion in labor income to the state economy.[8] Over the last year, new or expanded facilities for manufacturing clean energy technologies contributed 2.7% of state GDP.[9] Many of the largest and most successful U.S. companies have 100% renewable energy goals[10] and are actively seeking to do business in states that will facilitate seamless access to clean energy. Large employers such as Meta, Google, Intel, PayPal, and Apple have operations in Arizona that rely on clean energy to meet corporate sustainability goals. LG Energy Solutions and others have cited solar potential as a reason for major investments. Weakening or eliminating the REST undermines Arizona’s competitive advantage in attracting these companies and the jobs they bring.

Disinvestment in Arizona’s Energy Future
Without the guiding goals set by the REST, Arizona’s utilities may not make investments in the renewable energy resources needed to support a clean, affordable, and reliable grid in years to come. Having largely achieved the modest 15% renewable energy goal set by the REST, Arizona’s utilities are not committing to scale development of renewable energy resources to continue meeting or exceeding this goal as load growth accelerates. Recent integrated resource plans outline a continued reliance on fossil fuel resources, including the conversion of coal plants to gas and the extension of coal plant operations, and APS recently abandoned its near-term clean energy targets and delayed retirement of coal plants it previously determined are no longer economic for customers.[11] APS currently reports only 19% of its energy mix from renewables,[12] and TEP stands at 22%.[13] These figures fall short of the 15% threshold when considering growth expectations and cast doubt on assertions that the standard is no longer necessary.

The repeal of the REST Rule also sends a destabilizing signal to investors, developers, and corporate buyers who are considering energy development projects in the state. It suggests Arizona may no longer be a reliable place to conduct business in clean energy, especially as neighboring states pursue more ambitious goals. The impact is already visible: counties such as Yavapai[14] and Mohave[15] are considering or enacting de facto moratoriums or extreme caps on solar development, often citing the repeal of the REST as justification. In a state with just 15 counties, this trend introduces barriers and red tape that slow progress towards the grid of the future, posing serious risks to grid affordability, reliability, and energy independence.

Certainty in the Market for  Renewable Energy Credit (RECs)
The REST Rules are the only policy framework clearly defining RECs in Arizona, and the regulatory claim to renewable energy usage that RECs represent. RECs are the fundamental tool that entities with clean energy goals use to track compliance with clean energy targets and ensure they have secured a valid claim to clean energy. Put simply, RECs protect entities looking to access clean energy from misleading claims, greenwashing, and fraud. Without a clear, enforceable definition of RECs in A.A.C there is no reliable mechanism to ensure renewable generation is properly accounted for or that it can be uniquely attributed. This opens the door to double counting, where RECs generated in Arizona are counted towards multiple purposes because there is no clear definition. As a result, states, federal entities, or companies with clean energy goals may choose to avoid purchase of RECs from Arizona (and third-party certification providers may be unwilling to recognize them), which will further disincentivize investment in new clean energy resources across the state.

Deficiencies Identified in Staff’s July 31, 2025 Memorandum
Staff’s July 31, 2025 Memorandum recommends repealing the REST Rules without providing any substantive information about how this change would impact consumers and the economy, the costs and benefits, or why a repeal of the REST is necessary or even desirable. Most concerning, Staff’s Memorandum includes only a passing reference to the comments filed by nearly 30,000 members of the public. The overwhelming majority of the public’s comments are supportive of maintaining the REST in its current form or expanding state renewable energy goals.
While we respect Elliott Pollack & Co., whose work we also rely upon, the economic memorandum filed by Staff on August 21, 2024, contains no quantitative analysis. It also fails to identify industry stakeholders or their employees as affected parties, despite the clear implications for both.

Conclusion
We strongly urge the Commission to reject Staff’s Memorandum. Instead, we suggest that the Commission revisit previous efforts to modernize the REST Rules to reflect Arizona’s current opportunities, technological advancements, and economic goals, as reflected in Docket RU-00000A-18-0284.

This is a pivotal moment for Arizona’s clean energy leadership. Eliminating the state’s only enforceable renewable energy standard, without a clear replacement, introduces uncertainty, undermines accountability, and jeopardizes both voluntary and regulatory progress. Further, repealing a rule without substantive support in the record is arbitrary and capricious. We urge the Commission to retain the REST and use it as a foundation for building Arizona’s energy future.
Thank you for your consideration.

Respectfully,
Autumn T. Johnson
Executive Director
Arizona Solar Energy Industries Association (AriSEIA)
[email protected]
520-240-4757

Adrian Keller
Arizona Program Director
Solar United Neighbors (SUN)
[email protected]
602-610-9055

Kate Bowman
Interior West Regulatory Director
Vote Solar
[email protected]
703-674-8637

[1] Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA), Arizona Solar State Spotlight, June 2025, available here https://seia.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/Arizona.pdf.

[2] Database of State Incentives for Renewables and Efficiency (DSIRE), Renewable and Clean Energy Standards, April 2025, available here https://ncsolarcen-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/RPS-CES-April2025.pdf

[3] Database of State Incentives for Renewables and Efficiency (DSIRE), Energy Storage Targets, September 2024, available here https://ncsolarcen-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/DSIRE_Storage_Targets_September_2024.pdf

[4] Lazard LCOE, June 2025, available here https://www.lazard.com/news-announcements/lazard-releases-2025-levelized-cost-of-energyplus-report-pr/.

[5] Strategen, Arizona REST 2020 Progress Report, Mar. 3, 2020, available here https://www.ceres.org/resources/reports/arizona-renewable-energy-standard-and-tariff-2020-progress-report.

[6] Arizona Corporation Commission, ACC Directs Staff to Draft Rules to Repeal Renewable and Energy Efficiency Mandates, February 2024 available here https://www.azcc.gov/news/home/2024/02/07/acc-directs-staff-to-draft-rules-to-repeal-renewable-and-energy-efficiency-mandates
Arizona Corporation Commission, Chairman O’Connor and Commissioner Thompson Act to Sunset Energy Surcharges that Have Cost Arizona Ratepayers Nearly $3.4 Billion Dollars, February 2024, available here https://www.azcc.gov/news/home/2024/02/08/chairman-o-connor-and-commissioner-thompson-act-to-sunset-energy-surcharges-that-have-cost-arizona-ratepayers-nearly-3.4-billion-dollars.

[7] AriSEIA submitted over 450 pages of studies supporting the economics of renewables in Arizona. All such studies, including our county economic impact studies can be found with our October 1, 2024 comments filed in this docket, available here https://docket.images.azcc.gov/E000038867.pdf?i=1754888599487.

[8] The Western Way: Arizona’s Pro-Business Climate Drives New Jobs and Workforce Needs, available here https://www.thewesternway.org/tww-blog/2023/11/2/report-release-arizonas-pro-business-climate-drives-new-jobs-and-workforce-needs.

[9] Rhodium Group & MIT CEEPR, Clean Investment Monitor Database. Available at: https://www.cleaninvestmentmonitor.org/database.

[10] See Re100 members, Available at: https://www.there100.org/re100-members.

[11] AZ Central, APS to walk back clean energy goals, drawing criticism from environmentalists, available here https://www.azcentral.com/story/money/business/energy/2025/08/07/arizona-utility-will-walk-back-its-clean-energy-goals/85534895007/.

[12] APS SEC Form 10-K, December 31, 2024, P.5, available here https://d18rn0p25nwr6d.cloudfront.net/CIK-0000764622/4703b2d6-ddea-44b3-85bf-ef9814d7d691.pdf.  

[13] TEP 2024 Energy Mix, available here https://www.tep.com/our-energy-mix/.

[14] Yavapai County Planning & Zoning Ordinance, Section 608.

[15] Mohave County Ordinance No. 2024-10.

AriSEIA filed joint comments with Vote Solar and Solar United Neighbors today calling on the ACC to not undertake the annual 10% RCP decrease as requested by TEP, APS, and UNSE. There are too many other policy changes at the state and federal level that have negatively impacted the solar industry to further erode it now. 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
August 6, 2025

Phoenix, AZ — In a stunning reversal, Arizona Public Service (APS) has announced it is rescinding all previously stated clean energy goals—eliminating its 2030 targets of 65% clean and 45% renewable energy, walking back its 2031 coal exit timeline, and discarding its 2050 carbon-free objective.

This decision leaves Arizona’s largest utility with no coal retirement plan, no renewable energy goal, and only 19% of its energy currently coming from renewable sources—despite years of public commitments and regulatory filings suggesting a transition was underway.

“APS is walking away from every clean energy promise it made to the public, to regulators, to shareholders, and to the communities it serves,” said Autumn Johnson, Executive Director of the Arizona Solar Energy Industries Association (AriSEIA). “We are left with vague intentions and zero accountability. This is not a transition plan—it is a retreat.”

The reversal stands in direct contradiction to APS’s last two Integrated Resource Plans (IRP), one of which the utility defended before the Arizona Corporation Commission just last fall. Those IRPs included these now-abandoned commitments and were also used to justify APS’s lobbying for a securitization bill—legislation designed to help finance the cost of transitioning off coal. That rationale is now in serious doubt, as the utility appears to have no intent to exit coal or accelerate clean energy development.

“APS fought tooth and nail for a securitization tool they clearly do not intend to use,” said Johnson. “They are signaling not just delay, but abandonment of the entire transition.”

In recent statements, APS has attempted to justify its reversal by citing reliability concerns. But its own IRPs clearly show that clean energy, storage, and demand-side management are reliable, scalable resources capable of meeting Arizona’s energy needs. The decision to abandon those resources appears not only unjustified—but politically motivated.

“This is not about reliability—it is about politics,” said Johnson. “And customers are the ones who will pay the price, both in dollars and in missed economic opportunities.”

The announcement also echoes prior failures in utility planning—particularly in how the closure of the Navajo Generating Station left the Navajo Nation without clear timelines or transition opportunities. APS’s ongoing ambiguity around the Four Corners Power Plant continues that legacy of uncertainty, depriving impacted communities of the ability to plan for their future.

Meanwhile, APS is investing in new natural gas pipeline infrastructure, despite previous claims that gas would serve only as a short-term bridge. The company’s actions suggest a long-term recommitment to fossil fuel infrastructure at a time when there is no statewide energy plan and no enforceable clean energy standard in place.

The pending repeal of Arizona’s Renewable Energy Standard and Tariff (REST) will leave the state with no formal policy structure to ensure clean energy progress. In that context, APS’s abandonment of its own voluntary goals leaves Arizona residents, businesses, and rural communities with no guarantees, no accountability, and no timeline for a cleaner or more affordable energy future.

“This is a betrayal of public trust,” Johnson added. “I personally worked with APS during the formation of their clean energy commitment. I believed it represented a step forward—however modest—for a utility that had long resisted change. But now it is clear: APS lacks leadership, lacks innovation, and lacks the integrity to keep its word.”
_____________________________________________________________________________
The Arizona Solar Energy Industries Association (AriSEIA) is a nonprofit trade organization dedicated to advancing solar, storage, and electrification across Arizona. AriSEIA advocates for fair and equitable energy policy, promotes economic development through clean energy investment, and works to ensure that Arizona remains a competitive, reliable, and innovative energy leader.

Media Contact:
Autumn Johnson
Executive Director, AriSEIA
[email protected]
(520) 240-4757