Respectfully submitted by Lawrence E. Rafferty (rafflaw) Weekend Contributor
When I think of places that would be ideally suited for taking advantage of solar power, Arizona is high on the list. There are approximately 20,000 Arizona buildings utilizing solar collection technology to replace or supplement normal power sources. However, that number may soon decrease if a new “solar tax” is implemented.
“A new interpretation of state law in Arizona could force customers to pay property taxes on leased solar panels. In a state with an estimated 20,000 solar customers and 85 percent of new solar installations being leased systems, the implications of an extra charge are tremendous. The new tax could result in an additional $152 per year for a residential solar array and even more for larger installations, the Arizona Republic reported. What’s more, the tax would apply to both new and existing customers.” Think Progress
At first glance, I guess it should not surprise anyone that a new tax may be initiated. However, when that tax is a tax on solar panels on commercial and residential buildings and includes solar panel arrays that are leased, it raised some eyes in Arizona. Why would the State of Arizona decide on a tax on the collection of power of the sun? The answer may surprise you.
“So, who would support the effort to charge solar customers more money? Solar advocates in Arizona point to the state’s largest utility, Arizona Public Service Company (APS).
Leasing solar panels is often the only option for middle class customers who want to go solar but can’t afford the cost of purchasing the array. And as rooftop solar in particular booms across the U.S., it’s middle class families that are leading the way — posing a real threat to utilities like APS. In fact, “solar technology is being overwhelmingly adopted in middle-class neighborhoods in the U.S., as more than 60 percent of solar installations are occurring in zip codes with median incomes ranging from $40,000 to $90,000,” according to a recent analysis by Mari Hernandez of the Center for American Progress. This trend has utility companies “worried that rooftop solar may undermine their business models as more of their customers go solar and buy less power from them,” Hernandez explained.” Think Progress
I guess maybe I should not be surprised that the APS may be against technology that allows its customers to buy less energy from the utility. I guess I should also not be surprised who APS has teamed up with in order to fight the use of solar power in Arizona.
The public utility has ties with ALEC, the American Legislative Exchange Council and the state regulatory body also has very strong connections to ALEC. “In the ongoing fight over whether Arizona will continue its remarkable expansion of solar energy, a ThinkProgress analysis reveals four of five members of the state’s energy regulator are tied to the conservative anti-clean energy group, the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC).
The fight centers on Arizona Public Service Co. (APS), the state’s largest utility, versus solar energy companies over how much customers should be compensated for the energy produced by solar panels installed on their homes and businesses. APS believes customers receive too much credit for the excess energy produced by their panels while the industry maintains changing the policy, known as net-metering, would devastate their promising and rapidly expanding industry.
The state’s energy regulator, the Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC), is expected to begin hearings on the net-metering proposal in November. Four of the five commissioners are members of ALEC, the group backed by fossil fuel interests, major corporations and the ultra-conservative Koch brothers. In 2012, ALEC dedicated its efforts to dismantling renewable energy laws around the country and though they failed completely in that effort, leaked documents from their recent annual meeting indicates they have no intention of backing down from the fight against clean energy.” Think Progress 2
Doesn’t it seem that the Koch Brothers have their dirty energy fingers in just about everything? As we have seen in the linked articles, the new tax would benefit the public energy utility to the detriment of many middle class consumers who are trying to save a few dollars in energy cost, while at the same time supporting the goal of using cleaner energy sources. It is interesting that the idea of a new tax is proposed by the same organization and its backers that are against other clean energy supporting taxes that would negatively impact their corporate interests.
According to the free market proponents like ALEC and the Koch Brothers, the market is only free when it benefits their interests. Everyone else, including the planet be damned. The fact that many of the consumers who would be disadvantaged by this solar tax would be middle class homeowners is just icing on the cake for ALEC.
It bears repeating that the additional cost of the tax would range from approximately $152.00 per year for a residential array and $9867.00 per year for a large commercial installation. Is the Arizona Public Service Company trying to destroy the solar industry?
Will the ALEC packed state regulatory commission find in favor of the ALEC proposal or will it back the solar energy industry and residential and commercial consumers? What do you think?
“The views expressed in this posting are the author’s alone and not those of the blog, the host, or other weekend bloggers. As an open forum, weekend bloggers post independently without pre-approval or review. Content and any displays or art are solely their decision and responsibility.”
Karen,
Will you go on the record about your support for Planned Parenthood, Medicaid, SNAP, Head Start, free lunch programs?
I support all those programs and I think they greatly benefit single moms and their children who are struggling.
And, Karen, do you support Planned Parenthood?
I do not support Planned Parenthood. And I am pragmatic, not wrong and not a jerk.
Feynman,
I have deleted a comment in violation of the civility rule, in this case name calling.
And that was a winkey face.
Am I wrong?
Karen,
I am aware of the plight of single moms in this country. I support SNAP, Head Start, Medicaid. Do you?
Feynman:
Here is a link from Liberal NBC discussing the plight of the unwed moms in the black community. It is gradually getting on the radar that this is a really serious problem, and it also touches on the expectations of young black women that they will become single moms:
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/39993685/ns/health-womens_health/t/blacks-struggle-percent-unwed-mothers-rate/#.U2gYmV6fspE
Karen,
I believe there is something of a national discussion going on about many men who do not understand “NO”. You are swinging and missing – badly.
STDs were not the focus of the discussion.
The difference between rape and intercourse is salesmanship. 😉 There are some men who do not understand NO, not many as you contend.
Feynman,
I have deleted two more comments in clear violation of our civility rule. If you cannot comply with the minimal standards of civility on this blog, I ask that you not comment on this blog or move on to a blog that invites such personal attacks.
Feynman:
No, that is not how the statistics work. The % is based on the number of each ethnicity of babies born. It does not matter, for example, if there are 100 or 10,000 African American babies born. They look at what percentage, of those babies in each ethnicity, are born into single parent homes.
And, statistically, the African American community is suffering under a staggering percentage of single moms. It’s been discussed and documented in great detail as one of the single biggest threats to the community. Being born to a single mother has, by far, the highest risk factor for poverty, dropping out of school, ending up in foster care, using drugs, joining gangs, and going to jail. It’s very statistically significant. Getting married is not just something to do. Even with its high divorce rate, it does offer, statistically, some protection against these risk factors.
I care very much about the kids in America. I want all of them to have their best chance at life, regardless of race, ethnicity, or creed. And I want the women of the black community to take better care of themselves, to want more for themselves and their families.
I greatly enjoy the works of author Pearl Cleague, who has followed as a storyline in a couple of her novels this expectation in the black community for young women to thoughtlessly or deliberately become single moms.
Help. a comment has been eaten.
Annie – my argument has been that birth control should not be free to all socioeconomic levels, even rich women, not that prophylactics/birth control should not be available to the poor.
Feynman:
You posted, “Birth control is prescribed by a doctor. Condoms are something a woman may hope will be used, but she has little control that it will be.”
Eeeeek! “Little control?” How about saying, “No?” Unless 2 virgins get married and stay monogamous, condoms are the only means to prevent the spread of STDs. And women do have a say over when and if they are used.
Maybe I misunderstood your statement, because it sounds like women have to take the birth control pill and just hope they don’t get an STD because men just won’t wear condoms.
Karen – you did not misunderstand him.
Feynman:
You posted “Parents and kids grow very attached to teachers and their schools. It is a very bad idea to think you can uproot a child without the child being damaged. It shows you have little respect for that child.”
You could not possibly mean that parents should keep their kids in a public school where, in the case of my friends, they had subs the whole year and some kids were held back? I know you could not mean that, because it sounds like education is a priority for you, too.
Parents don’t put their kids into new schools on a whim. They do it when their kids are failing, hate school, or there are serious problems with the public school system. You don’t keep throwing more effort after wasted effort. You change your approach.
The parents I know who switched their kids to this charter are just effusive with praise, especially about the positive changes in their children.
I have never said that all charters are wonderful. I have, in fact, stated very clearly that I want ANY failing school to close if it cannot get its act together – public or private.
Were Chicago’s schools closed because they were failing? If so, the public outcry brings to mind the MLK, Jr hospital in CA. It hired minorities whenever possible to staff position, so the emphasis was on basal melanin levels rather than excellence. With such a superficial selection process, the hospital caused scandal after scandal – extremely high rates of medical mistakes, patient deaths, patient injuries, wrong medications, and even an alarming rate of “falling out of chairs” leading to work comp claims by staff. At one point, a large percentage of the staff were out on medical leave because they “fell out of a chair”. I followed this closely. And yet, when the hospital finally, after they failed chance after chance to improve, lost its accreditation, the community was outraged at at the closure. I wanted to get a bull horn and call out to them that they were entitled to EXCELLENT medical care, and that the hospital closed because going there as a patient could KILL you! But they didn’t understand. The typical players claimed, loudly, that the hospital was closed because everyone involved was racist. Never mind that the LA Times had run article after article that it was like playing Russian Roulette to go there. They followed it for, I believe, a year, before they finally lost their credentials.
Just like the public schools, I thought, this hospital has had multiple chances, and they are still failing miserably. Shut it down as a failed experiment and get a completely new facility in here right away to serve the community.
Karen, I have many stories from my days teaching history in public school. Where I live, charter schools are fought tooth nail by the powerful teacher’s union.
Rafflaw – thanks for finding my posts! 🙂
Feynman:
I know a few teachers, and they complain bitterly about how the union does not reward excellent teachers. They reward seniority. They would indeed love to teach at a school with arts, sciences, and music. And so they come in droves to teach at Charter schools, who do actually reward excellent teachers.
Paul, The illegitimate birth rate for black babies is a tragedy. And, we know the different stages of grief involving tragedies. Some people are in denial and disassociate by spinning numbers. “Whatever gets you through the night, it’s alright..alright.”
There are lies. Damn lies. And statistics.
Here’s how I did the math
Let’s say there are 10,000 white women in The New America
And the population of black women in The New America is about 10% of the total white women. That means there are 1,000 black women.
The out of wedlock birth rate for white women is 29% = 2,900 babies
The out of wedlock birth rate for black women is 72% = 720 babies
So while the percentage rates are much greater for black mothers, many more white babies are being raised in single mother homes.
And here’s a funny thing about taking a closer look….many more dollars are going to be needed by white children than black children.
Now that’s gonna just KILL some people.
Strut
Yep.
CDC has figures (2007) and rates are growing among all women. Big jump in Hispanic women. Increase for black and white women not so much.
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db18.pdf
Excellent report. Wish it was more current. We probably don’t want to spend the money for it though.