7. ‘Dark money’ influencing election of regulators

The utility prefers the efficiency of the smart meters, which use radio signals to transmit customer usage back to the utility, eliminating the need to manually read them to prepare billings.

Smart meters also allow utilities to do things like restore service faster because a technician doesn’t have to visit a residence.

Regulators had approved fees of $50 for customers who want to swap out a smart meter for a meter that must be read manually, plus an extra $5 per month for the visit required to read them.

But many customers, including Warren Woodward of Sedona, want APS to abandon smart meters.

He and other smart-meter opponents fear undocumented health threats from the radio signals and cited privacy concerns.

When Woodward and another customer challenged the new fees, the regulators met with attorneys and decided to rescind them until they could be approved in a full rate case.

The decision has cost APS millions in uncollected monthly fees in the past two years.

The settlement calls for restoring the $50 swap-out fee and a monthly $5 service fee for refusing a smart meter. This item is likely to be opposed by the 15,485 APS customers now choosing to use the old meters.

However, the issue seems to be losing a bit of steam, as the number of opt-out customers has decreased slightly in the past year, according to APS figures.

6. Hours change for time-of-use rates

appliances during that time.

California and other states are beginning to introduce such rates for the same reason they are used extensively in Arizona.

Both APS and Salt River Project, the state’s other big utility, have more customers voluntarily using the plans than any other utilities nationwide.

APS proposes changing the peak hours of these programs to 3-8 p.m. weekdays.

Current rate plans charge peak rates from noon to 7 p.m. or 3-6 p.m. in summer.

Consumer groups contend that 8 p.m. is too late in the evening to continue charging peak rates because people can’t cook or take care of other chores before putting children to bed.

The commissioners are working against a backdrop of controversy that stems from APS involving itself in the statewide elections for the officials who regulate the company.

Two commissioners, Doug Little and Chairman Tom Forese, were elected in 2014 with the help of dark-money groups thought to be funded by APS, which does not deny involvement.

APS confirmed last year it helped the elections of the other three commissioners.

Only second-term Commissioner Robert Burns has challenged APS’ participation in elections.

The other four commissioners have said they can’t legally prevent a utility from using its profits to support political candidates without interfering with the company’s First Amendment rights.

Burns has a pending legal challenge attempting to force APS and its parent company, Pinnacle West Capital Corp., to disclose the spending.

Many utility customers are uncomfortable with a utility spending money to elect the people who decide how much profit the utility makes and how much it

Even though about 30 of 40 parties in the case have agreed to the settlement, it doesn’t mean it will win approval from the five commissioners.

For starters, there are parties to the case, including AARP and SWEEP, that did not agree to the settlement. Other groups, like the smart-meter opponents, are not parties but will express concerns with the commissioners.

Further, the parties that did sign the settlement can back out if any “material” changes are made to the deal.

10. Low-income customers would get a break

Advocates for low-income families have signed on to the settlement.

It would allocate an additional $13 million to assist more low-income customers, who get a 25 percent discount on their bills. Limited-income customers with medical equipment in the home get a 35 percent discount.

It also would designate $1.25 million in emergency funding for low-income customers to pay overdue bills.

Plenty of other points could warrant further questioning by commissioners. But once the votes are cast, the deal says APS can’t ask for another rate case until June 1, 2019. And rate cases generally take a year or more to conclude.