Did you know that in 2010 alone utility customers will pay over $120 million in tariffs added to their utility bills caused by unreasonable mandates imposed by the Corporation Commission?

WHAT MY BILL DOES:

1.  Gives the legislature authority over setting renewable energy policy.  The legislature can set a statewide energy policy that is good for AZ and for utility customers.  This will streamline our state’s energy policy by keeping it within one body, as opposed to two entities with separate agendas and will make sure that the citizens have more say in setting energy policy since they can contact their elected representatives.  Currently,  it only takes 3 members of the Corporation Commission to set energy policy that affects citizens all over the state.

2.  Adds nuclear and hydro-electric to the mix of clean energy sources that can be used to reach a 15% clean energy goal.

WHY I’M INTRODUCING THE BILL:

1.  The renewable energy mandates imposed on the utility companies by the Corporation Commission are costing utility customers MILLIONS of extra dollars every year.  To give you an example:
·    APS and Tucson Electric  will charge their customers over $120 Million this year to pay for the mandates.
·    Sun City Recreation Centers paid over $52,000 in these extra tariffs in 2009 alone.
·     In these economic times, it is not right to ask hard-working Arizonans, Senior Citizens, and businesses to shoulder these extra costs

2.    The AZ Constitution gives the Corp. Commission authority over rate-making only.  The legislature has authority over setting policy, not the Corporation Commission.

3.  The Corporation Commission mandates LIMIT clean energy sources that can be used to satisfy their mandates to wind, solar, geothermal, and biomass.  Although these are good options that will continue to be pursued, AZ needs a diverse mix of energy sources that can produce base load (not intermittent) energy and not force more expensive and less-reliable energy onto consumers.  After all, solar energy costs between .13-.16 per Kwh, whereas nuclear costs .02 cents.

HISTORY:
1.  In 2006, the Corp. Commission mandated that all electric utilities (except SRP since they are a govt entity) get 15% of their energy from wind, solar, geothermal, and biomass by 2025 (each year up to 2025 they have to reach a certain %)
2.  In addition, the Corp. Commission mandated that of that 15%, 30% has to come from distributed energy (example:  solar panels on the roof) by 2012.
3.  In addition, the Corp. Commission mandated that of that 30% of distributed energy, half has to come from commercial and half from residential.
4.  Penalties can be imposed by the Corporation Commission.
5.  The Corporation Commission mandated that the utilities charge all the utility customers a tariff on their bills to pay for incentives and compliance costs to meet the mandates.  THIS TARIFF AMOUNTS TO MILLIONS IN COSTS TO UTILITY CUSTOMERS EACH YEAR.  (For example:  APS charged their customers $81 million over and above their energy usage this year.  Tucson Electric charged $40 Million)
5.  To date, the utilities have not been able to reach the distributed energy portion of the mandates because it relies on individual homeowners being able to afford expensive solar panels.
6.  In order to meet the mandates, the utilities have to give huge incentives to customers to install solar panels on their roof.  One of the lobbyists has $54,000 solar panels on his roof.  After federal, state, and utility rebates and credits, he paid $14,000 out of pocket.  That means the taxpayers and other ratepayers subsidized his solar panels 74%.

ANSWER TO CONCERNS:

1.    Some of the solar companies will say they are opposed to my bill even though I have reached out to them and offered compromises to address their concerns.  Let’s face it…they have a good deal going on:  The Corporation Commission mandates force the utility companies to buy electricity from them no matter what the cost or the reliability of the electricity….of course they like the current deal.  Unfortunately, the tariffs that pay for the subsidies going to them are being forced upon hard-working Arizonans and businesses, many of which can not even afford to buy solar panels themselves, but have to pay for someone else’s.

2.    I believe the solar company concerns are over-dramatic.  I have spoken to all the utility companies including APS and SRP.  They have all said they will continue to pursue solar and other alternative energy sources no matter if my bill passes or not.  The momentum for solar is already moving ahead and the support for it is evident by the various solar tax incentives the legislature has already passed.  The legislature is not going to put the solar companies out of business. In fact, I believe the legislature is a much friendlier environment for enacting a state wide energy policy.

3.    The Corporation Commission is threatened by my bill because it takes away some of their authority.  I have spoken to several of the Corporation Commissioners and share many of their visions for energy in our state.  However, I believe it is clear that the legislature, not the Corporation Commission, has authority over setting policy in this state and that the Corporation Commission over-stepped their constitutional authority.

My bill is a first step in the process of setting up a statewide comprehensive energy policy in our state that is not only diverse, but also affordable to our citizens.

It’s frustrating to me and it should be frustrating to you to know that we could have balanced the budget back on June 30th if at least one Democratic legislator would have voted yes.  Instead, not one single Democratic legislator voted for the budget package that included both modest spending reductions and a chance for an increase in revenues, something the Democrats claim they want.

Democratic legislators say they want to work with Republicans, but I just don’t see any proof of it yet.   They say they would vote for a budget fix that includes both revenue enhancements (tax increases) and spending cuts.  Yet when they had the chance to do so on June 30th, not one of them did.

Since none of the Democrats will help, Republicans have been forced to get the required number of votes from within their own ranks.  Many of us have had to make very difficult decisions and compromises.  Quite frankly, there are things in the budget bill that I simply don’t like.  But I realize that the future of our State is more important than my personal beliefs.

The Democrats latest proposal is to raise taxes permanently by over $2 Billion per year.  They want to raise property taxes another $730 Million/year and expand sales tax to services, so you’d even have to pay sales tax when you visited your doctor or hairdresser.  They know the Republicans are opposed to this, they know they don’t have the votes to pass it, and I would hope they know the public can’t afford it, but it gives them the opportunity to claim they have an alternative plan.

I, like many of my fellow Republican legislators, have been making hard decisions because we know the future of our State is at stake.  I sincerely hope that my Democratic friends will soon join in the cause.

I was honored to speak at the Glendale Veteran’s Day Event at Westgate City Center on Saturday, November 7th. Pictured to the right in an Uncle Sam outfit is WWII veteran Ray Mills. Ray and his wife, Betty, now continue their service to our country by volunteering with Freedoms Foundation of Valley Forge. They partner with teachers and teach students about the principles on which our country was founded. Ray was recently inducted into the Arizona Veterans Hall of Fame. Pictured to the left is Al Morton. Al served two tours in the Vietnam War and received a Purple Heart. Al continues to serve our country by helping other veterans and serving as Vice Commander of the Sandy Coor VFW Post 1433 in Glendale.

Sun City’s Veteran’s Day celebration at Sunland Memorial Cemetery on November 11th was indeed a great tribute to our Veterans. Many veterans from all branches of the military, plus women who served as “Rosie the Riveters” in WWII, joined in the event. I was very impressed.

Later in the day, I was again honored to speak at a Veteran’s Day/Tea Party event at the State Capitol. I shared a personal story of my father’s service in WWII and asked participants to continue to fight for the freedoms that our Veterans fought so hard to defend.

One of the main reasons I ran for legislature is because I am concerned about the future of our nation and I want to make a difference. Please join me in making a difference. Together we can protect the principles that have made this nation great.

One of the most important duties this year has been balancing our state budget. The legislature balanced the 2009 budget in January and then, in June, balanced the 2010 budget twice-both times without a tax increase. We continue to work with the Governor to reach a compromise budget that she will sign. On July 31st House and Senate leadership reached a budget agreement with the Governor that was approved by the House, and as of July 31st was one vote short in the Senate. We will resume negotiations this week.

One of my next goals is to form a task force comprised of republican and democrat legislators, citizens, and state employees to work on a way to limit state welfare and health assistance to only those people who really need help and to only legal U.S. citizens. If you have suggestions or know of specific violations, please contact me at: 602-926-5413 or DLesko@azleg.gov I certainly could use your help.

I also want to continue to meet and update people throughout our legislative district.
If you’d like me to attend your event or come down to the Capitol to meet with me or get a tour, please contact me. Again, my number is 602-926-5413, my email is DLesko@azleg.gov and my website is: www.DebbieLesko.com

I really enjoy my job. At times it’s very challenging, but it sure is rewarding. I want to thank all of you again for giving me this opportunity. Working together I truly believe we can make a difference!

The legislature passed a balanced budget without a tax increase twice. Once on June 4th, then again on June 30th.

The June 4th budget bill was not transmitted to the Governor because she said she would veto it, so the legislature changed portions of the bill at the Governor’s request and passed another balanced budget without a tax increase on June 30th. The Governor vetoed it because it did not include the sales tax increase she requested.

It has become abundantly clear that the Governor will veto any budget bill without a referral to the ballot of a sales tax increase, something most Republicans, including myself, oppose.

On July 29th-31st Republican leadership struck a deal with the Governor. It is a deal that will be tax revenue neutral after approximately 4 years and then become a tax cut.

DETAILS OF THE LATEST BUDGET PROPOSAL:

In exchange for asking the voters if they want to increase sales taxes by 1 cent in year one and year two and ½ cent in year three, the following will take place:

1. Permanent property tax cuts of $250 million/year whether the voters approve the sales tax increase or not.
2. Permanent individual income tax cuts of $200 million/year starting in 2011, whether the voters approve the sales tax increase or not. The percentage cut will be the same over all income brackets.
3. Permanent corporate income tax cuts of $200 million/year starting in 2011, whether the voters approve the sales tax increase or not.
4. Cap state spending at the 2009 budget level ($10.2 Billion) for 3 years.
5. Ask the voters if they will temporarily suspend Proposition 105 for 3 years, so that some “auto-pilot” increases in state spending approved by prior voter propositions can be suspended temporarily.
6. Make permanent state spending cuts of $580 million, in addition to the roughly $500 million in permanent spending cuts made in January for the 2009 budget.

This budget plan was passed out of the House on July 31st and is one vote short in the Senate as of July 31st.

A vast majority of Republicans do not want to ask the voters to increase sales taxes. It is against what we believe in. However, since the Governor has made it abundantly clear that she will veto ANY budget without asking the voters for a sales tax increase, the choice was accept this deal, settle for a worse deal later, or let the state run out of money so that schools and everything else suffers. We’ll be back to work again next week.

One of the key differences between the June 4th and June 30th approved budgets, the Governor’s proposal, and the democrat’s proposal is a tax increase. (Please click on the link to the left entitled, Budget Explanation, for more details.) The plan approved by republican legislators on June 4th and June 30th does not include a tax increase. The Governor’s proposal includes a $1 Billion/year sales tax increase and a $164 Million property tax increase for 2010. The democrat’s proposal includes $1.2 Billion/year increase in sales tax and a $1 Billion/year property tax increase.

Another key difference in the proposed budget plans is the amount of spending cuts. Since 2004, the state has increased spending by $3.7 billion. Our state is now $3 billion short. The more we reduce spending now, the easier it will be to balance the budget in the future. Without making cuts, economic models show that the gap between spending and revenue will just continue to increase each and every year through at least 2012.

The budget passed by the republican legislators on June 4th and June 30th cuts spending by $631 Million in 2010. In comparison, the Governor’s proposed plan cuts $278 Million and the democrat’s plan cuts $78 Million.

In the June 4th plan; no major agency was cut more than 3.3% as a percentage of their total funds. As an example, Kindergarten-12th grade education was cut by 2.2% of their total funds. Although difficult, these modest cuts will allow school districts to rehire many of the teachers they had let go.

I hope that I have at least shed some light on what is happening down here at the legislature. I know some of you will not agree with me on every issue, but I am confident that we agree on many more issues than we disagree on. I truly believe that we can solve this problem if we continue to work together.

This bill, which will become law August 27th gives parents the opportunity to place their special needs or foster-care children in schools that are best for their child and doesn’t cost the state and taxpayers any extra money.  In fact it will save the state money, thus freeing up limited funds for public education or other purposes.  I was honored to vote for and speak in favor of this bill on the floor of the House of Representatives.

Here are the reasons I support this bill:

1.    This bill provides a great opportunity for parents to place their special needs or foster-care child in a school that best serves their child’s educational needs.  I am Vice Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee.  We listened to testimony in committee on this bill.  Andrea Weck testified that the public schools were not meeting her daughter Lexie’s educational needs and that her daughter was now flourishing in a private school funded by the scholarship program.  It is an opportunity that she could not otherwise afford.  We heard testimony that foster children are often moved from school to school with changing foster parents and that this bill will give them the opportunity to attend one school.

2.    This bill will save the state money since the private school scholarship is capped at 90% of what would have been spent for that same child in a public school.  That’s a saving to the state of 10%.

3.    This bill will relieve the public schools of the cost of educating hundreds of special education children that will instead attend private schools. The public schools have complained for years that special education funding is not enough and they have to pull money away from other sources to supplement the special education costs.

I believe our goal should be to provide the best education possible to each child.  If a private school can provide a better education at a lower cost to the state and taxpayers, why wouldn’t we want to do that for our children?

Opponents, including the public school teachers’ union (AZ Education Association) and the democrat legislators who are often politically supported and funded by the teachers’ union, tell parents that the public schools will receive less money since they get paid per child.  While that is technically accurate, they fail to add that the child will no longer be in the public school, thus the school no longer has that expense.

If our goal is truly about providing the best education, and not just about growing public schools and protecting jobs for public school employees, I think most will agree that this legislation is truly a win-win for all.

The endless amount of federal government bail-outs and unprecedented levels of debt have got to stop. President Obama has spent over $1 Trillion in just 100 days and plans to double the national debt in just 5 years. Even China, who is now America’s largest creditor, is starting to say no more. To give some perspective, this would be equivalent to the typical Arizona family which makes $47,000/year spending $72,000/year and cutting $2/year (the mathematical equivalent of what Obama says he will cut spending by), and put the remaining $24,998/year on a revolving credit card.  We wouldn’t do that in our homes and the government shouldn’t do it using OUR money either.