FEATURE ARTICLE


"Smart" Meter Case Taken to Arizona Supreme Court

"Smart" Meter Case Taken to Arizona Supreme Court
 
Donna Hancock 
Date: 01-10-2019
Subject: Arizona's Top News

"Smart" Meter Case Taken to

Arizona Supreme Court
Information & Perspective by Warren Woodward
Sedona, Arizona ~ January 10, 2019

 

PETITION FOR REVIEW PDF
 

          Last month the Court of Appeals ruled against me in my appeal of the Arizona Corporation Commission's decision regarding Arizona Public Service Company's "smart" meters. Among other things, that "smart" meter decision allows APS to charge customers who refuse "smart" meters an extortion fee, and it completely disallows solar and commercial customers to refuse a "smart" meter when in the past they always could.

          The case was consolidated with my appeal against another decision the ACC made regarding the so-called "grandfathering" of APS's R-Basic Large plan which is no longer available to customers even though some people are still on it. I also appealed the so-called "90-day trial period" whereby new APS customers can't take the R-Basic rate for 90 days but instead have to be on a Demand or Time Of Use rate.

          Denying certain rate plans to residential customers while other residential customers can take those rate plans is obvious discrimination. Regarding the 90-day trial period, the Court was so dumb it actually stated that there was no discrimination because new customers could choose from among all the available plans -- except they can't! If new customers could chose from all the rate plans then there wouldn't be a 90-day trial period!

          That wasn't the only obvious error the Court made. It ignored evidence. It didn't know what evidence was (comments at ACC open meetings are not "testimony"). It misrepresented my positions in order to make them easier to argue against (straw man fallacies). It even doctored a quote from a case citation to make the quote support the Court's result oriented decision.

          The details are in my Petition for Review to the Arizona Supreme Court which was filed there yesterday and is attached to this email.