Will APS regret staying out of this race?

Democrat Sandra Kennedy seems poised to win a seat on the utility-regulating state Corporation Commission.

Arizona Public Service, with whom Kennedy locked horns when she served a previous term on the commission, didn’t appear to have campaigned heavily against her.

Or to have campaigned heavily in support of the two Republicans in the race.

Which raises the question, did APS and its parent company, Pinnacle West Capital Corp., hurt their cause in sitting out the election?

One can argue that the utility should have played a bigger role to protect its interests. But a stronger argument is that it acted just as wisely, if not more so, to stand pat.

Evidence in recent elections certainly points to APS and Pinnacle West standing to gain politically by spending more in the race. In 2016, they spent millions to help elect three Republican candidates to the commission and, presumably, in 2014 gave millions to “dark money” groups to successfully block Kennedy and another Democratic candidate from office.

And it isn’t like Kennedy, a onetime lawmaker, has changed her positions since she first served on the Corporation Commission from 2008 to 2012.

She advocates increased use of rooftop solar and of other renewable energy sources of utilities. She was also in favor of Proposition 127, the ambitious cleanenergy mandate that went down in defeat in the general election. All of which APS contests.

Plus, the League of Conservation Voters, a national environmental advocacy organization, spent roughly $4 million to support Kennedy and Kiara Sears, the other Democrat in the race.

But this year was, in many ways, an anomaly.

Prop. 127 dominated APS and Pinnacle West’s attention. The measure would have imposed targets on utilities of 50 percent sourcing of clean energy by 2030. It got the backing of millions of dollars from California billionaire Tom Steyer, which APS and its parent countered with millions in television ads and mailers of their own. That was a bigger fish to fry.

And this year’s slate of Republican candidates, including appointed Commissioner Justin Olson and newcomer/ attorney Rodney Glassman, who advanced to the general election, took pains to distance themselves from the utility.

They campaigned on the need to step up ethics reforms to stop the undue influence of APS and Pinnacle West — going so far to suggest the utility’s spending in political campaigns have cast a veil of corruption over the commission.

Perhaps there was a calculation that with a statewide Republican edge in voter registration, the utility could stand on the sidelines. Perhaps there was one, too, of Olson and Glassman not needing a boost — Olson has the advantage of already holding the office and Glassman was well-funded (he raised more than $800,000 — about 10 times the war chest of Olson and dwarfing the $278,000 Kennedy got, mostly in public funding as a Clean Elections candidate).

Or perhaps there’s the belief that even with the election of a Democrat, the remaining four members would be Republicans who generally favor minimal mandates and regulations.

That scenario is less likely given that Robert Burns has been a thorn to the side of APS, both in its $95 million rate increase, which he opposed, and in its refusal to disclose its 2014 election spending, which he seeks to uncover.

The rate increase was challenged by a group of consumers and will likely be revisited by the Corporation Commission, pending a recommendation by an administrative-law judge.

Provided that she holds onto her lead and wins one of the two open seats, Sandra Kennedy will look to shake things up on the commission — whether as a result of a (semi) blue wave or a backlash against APS.

If it’s the latter, APS and Pinnacle West’s decision to opt out of politicking in this year’s Corporation Commission race may prove no more harmful to their interests or image than opting in.