Opinion: Tucson should approve Prop. 421 without giving up on public power

I’ve been an active climate voice in Tucson and have consistently challenged this city to do better, particularly when it comes to heat. In 2023, I supported a campaign to defeat what I believed was a badly negotiated franchise agreement in the old Prop. 412. In 2026, I’ll be voting yes on Prop. 421.

In 2023, we were blindsided by a franchise agreement negotiated behind closed doors that hijacked a high-leverage climate opportunity to center undergrounding interests, all to preserve one neighborhood’s sightlines. But in 2026, we have a different agreement, and the ecosystem surrounding this opportunity is also gravely different.

What we have in front of us is the direct result of community input. Since 2023, City staff hosted town halls and listening sessions where community feedback shaped what became of the Energy Collaboration Agreement. Yes, it’s a 25-year agreement, but it’s not difficult to leave. And the length matters: A five-year term would have yielded far less than $2 million annually; the 25-year frame is what makes that payout bigger. Either party can decide to walk away six months later (or immediately if our Council puts it to a vote), and the City and Tucson Electric Power revisit it every two years to adjust.

The $2 million commitment of shareholder money is the first agreement of its kind in Arizona, and is one of only a handful like it in the entire country. Voting it down doesn’t punish TEP. It punishes the City, which we want to see better resourced right now, not less.

That money could fund cooling centers that save lives. It could support home energy retrofits for neighbors who can’t afford AC. It could even be directed to a public power escrow to seed the municipalization fund this community wants. The City decides; that’s the point.

I don’t trust TEP either. But this money isn’t for TEP; it’s for the City. Tucson is navigating a budget crisis while trying to add to its initiatives on climate. Withholding these resources doesn’t weaken TEP; it weakens our resource pool.

I understand the appeal of holding out for public power. I believe in it as a long-term goal, and I appreciate that there’s such enthusiasm! We wouldn’t have this ECA without the community threatening municipalization. But municipalization is a lengthy, expensive legal process with real financial risk and a low success rate. This fight wouldn’t be resolved before 2028 even if we started tomorrow. And the franchise agreement doesn’t prohibit public power! The City is studying public power right now; these are not mutually exclusive pathways.

Which brings me to the part I think is being dangerously undervalued: the world outside Tucson.

We are not making this decision in a vacuum. We are living through a federal administration that has actively undermined climate policy, attacked clean energy funding, and shown little regard for democratic norms. The signals for 2028 are not at all promising. In that environment, I don’t feel comfortable with Tucson being locked in a years-long legal battle with our utility, when we may need that energy, that money, and that solidarity for something even more urgent.

If we get through this federal moment with our government intact, the case for public power will still be there. Those options don’t disappear. This franchise agreement doesn’t foreclose on that future, but it encourages us to be more strategic about when we pick that fight.

I’ve come to think about it like this: this isn’t really a 25-year commitment; it’s a three-year agreement for more than $6 million. After the state and federal elections this November, we’ll know a lot more about the status of our democracy, any future for a federal climate policy, and whether this City Council is brave enough to put public power to a vote against an unforeseen legislative makeup. We can reassess then. But right now, that money is available, it’s real, and it goes to the City rather than TEP’s goals.

Vote yes on Prop. 421. We’ll tackle public power after.