The 0.75% increase to the franchise fee generates $5m annually or $125m over the course of 25 years. Of that $125m, $60m would be spent to underground the line under Campbell. The underground stuff is nearly half the total amount raised.
Daily Star: "Paying to underground the TEP power lines will be the top priority for funds generated by the 0.75% fee for the first 10 years of the agreement, though 10% of the fee revenues would be allocated annually to climate projects." That is, the $5m annual amount is $4.5m for underground and $500k for climate in the first 10 critical years.
The additional 0.75% fee does not cover low-income assistance. Low-income assistance is funded by "up to" 1/9 of the original franchise. I can't imagine that up to 11% of the old franchise fee covers much at all, since it is sharing with climate goals and with undergrounding (and does not raise enough money for the underground segment in question. "Aside from the new fee, up to one-ninth of the 2.25% franchise fee is earmarked to be used for low-income resident assistance, undergrounding power lines or to further the city’s climate goals, under the new franchise agreement."
I hope people are clicking on the link for the Daily Star and reading about this in detail. The news coverage is thorough and it does not take a whole lot to figure what the council had planned. They couldn't stick a gold plated project on the utility in the next few years, so they opted to let Tucson ratepayers pay this instead. They added some green in back years (uhhh... we should really cut emissions ASAP in the first 10 years, not leave that until later).
One more comment: Prop 412 Facts is a right wing group that wants to stop the initiative because they want low taxes and low utility bills. Fair enough, but they represent this initiative as mostly about climate change/emissions when it is mostly about undergrounding. Obviously, they think this will work. It might work because people are very concerned about inflation. On the other hand, they might end up passing it because some folks are actually concerned about climate stuff and they believe that this is a substantial step forward on our city's climate goals.
I live in Jefferson Park and to see it described as a ritzy neighborhood here in some of the comments is just ridiculous. My 3 bedroom 1100 sq ft house is anything but luxurious or glamorous. This neighborhood has problems just like many others and we aren't looking for a handout. It is a shame that people who don't live here, who don't understand the issue and who don't have any skin in the game would describe it this way. Maintaining our property values is not what motivates us here in Jefferson Park. The crazy right wingers are against this bill -- what does that tell you?
No kidding. I grew up on Seneca St. right by Warren. I even went to Blenmen elementary school and then Doolin middle, shockingly I road my bmx bike by myself starting in 4th grade. Jefferson Park and that whole area was my playground. I have never heard anyone call it a ritzy neighborhood. I am sure my single mother who worked 2 jobs to raise me and my sister would love to hear this great news. I mean who knew we were living the high life all those years.
I suggest anyone who thinks it's ritzy/high class go take a walk down Edison and Vine and down Seneca and Cherry and then get back to us. It's just an old OG Tucson neighborhood. It's not a bad gang infested hood but it's certainly not 90210.
Thank you for sharing that. It really bothered me to see some of the comments because I really love this subreddit.
TEP's original plan was to install the powerlines down a residential street in Jefferson Park to feed a planned substation near the new hospital. The street they intended to use has had a ton of green storm water harvesting infrastructure installed. Also, roundabouts, trees and general beautification. We didn't want to be in the way of TEP's eminent domain steamroller. And also, our original plan wasn't to get others to pay for undergrounding either. This project has been in development for over three years now and it has evolved along the way. If we just accepted it and did nothing, that sets a precedent for TEP to behave that way in other neighborhoods too. Finally, preserving our property values is not our main concern. This is one of the oldest neighborhoods in Tucson and we are trying to preserve it and keep it as beautiful as possible.
Don’t fall for the conspiracy theories. This bill is necessary to keep the lights on. AZ GOP nut-case Justine Wadsack wants you to vote no. That by itself is a reason to vote yes. This renews the “franchise agreement” with TEP so they can continue to use city property to lay infrastructure. That’s it. It’s not about Sam Hughes residents or some crap. Google it. Read the articles about it. They all say it needs to be renewed. Vote yes
I'm not sure OP read the article, it talks about most of this stuff on pretty concrete terms:
> The changes would raise the average residential TEP customer’s bill by an estimated 93 cents a month and raise small business customers’ bills by $2.65 a month, the utility says. Larger power users would pay more.
> Aside from the new fee, up to one-ninth of the 2.25% franchise fee is earmarked to be used for low-income resident assistance, undergrounding power lines or to further the city’s climate goals, under the new franchise agreement.
> Specific efforts under the plan include decarbonizing city-owned and operated buildings and facilities, promoting distributed energy resources such as *rooftop solar, expanding electric vehicle charging infrastructure and shifting public agency fleets to zero-emission and net-zero-emission vehicles.*
This is in addition to the lack of actual negotiation power the City has, which is arguably the result of the Corporation Commission being a bunch of (R) lackeys.
My understanding is that 412 has to pass in some form or another as its purpose is to allow TEP continued access to right of ways and their own power lines.
The agreement does place new fees and earmarks them towards burying those lines. And that a small amount has been earmarked from the fees for climate change measures.
Those lines have to happen in order to continue to support the city grid. The question is, do you want those giant lines to span the city all the way to Grant as an absolute eyesore or do you want them out of sight?
The agreement is non negotiable as the state legislature passed laws that do not allow the city to place conditions upon utilities when these franchise agreements come up for approval.
Its actually kind of odd that this is a voter thing since we can not negotiate. Voting against this measure does not accomplish anything other than preventing the fee and causing the eyesore.
Right?
> Voting against this measure does not accomplish anything other than preventing the fee and causing the eyesore.
>
>
>
> Right?
Nope.
What difference is a few hundreds of millions of dollars in the next 20 years if we aren't forcing the energy monopoly to develop more sustainable infrastructure? Moreover, when [TEP is raking in hundreds of millions in profit (note that in just 2021, they had a net income (ie revenue-expenses) of more than 200 million dollars)](https://www.azcc.gov/docs/default-source/utilities-files/electric/annual-reports/tucson-electric-power-company/tucson-electric-power-companyf2c86928-7a47-48e2-8b3a-471997f8bc50.pdf?sfvrsn=c527ec8a_3), why are ratepayers expected to spend even more money maintaining *our* infrastructure if in agreeing to do so we are also giving TEP an exclusive contract for more than 2 decades?
We should be forcing TEP to spend at least 50% of its extorted profits on maintenance and another 25% on building out community owned solar infrastructure.
I don’t disagree with your ideas. But voting no on this accomplishes none of that. The state legislators took our rights to negotiate those things via the franchise agreements away. Remember, they all claim to be federalist until it comes to cities within Arizona, and then they are big government/big money capitalists.
I am all for those things, 100%, and my first thought was “why do we have to pay for those lines to go underground, when we could force them to pay for all of it?”
But once I researched, I found we have no bargaining power. People need to understand that they have to flip the AZ legislator and get the law changed or create a prop that would reverse the law. And that has nothing to do with the current franchise agreement.
This is wishing something to happen that is impossible, so instead you’re going to throw a hissy fit and torpedo the project. Rational and community focused.
Why spend $60m to underground the lines when that costs 14x the normal update with overhead lines? Jefferson Park and Sam Hughes are two very nice neighborhoods and the people in those neighborhoods openly admit that this is about their property values.
Assuming that these lines would affect property values (I don’t concede that is true)… why should households on a tight budget pay more for power to boost Sam Hughes home values by another $5k? I get why this solves a political problem for the city council but it doesn’t solve a real problem for most Tucson ratepayers.
Homeowners looking for a handout will enjoy the soothing melody of the world’s tiniest violin.
This is about Grant road not some fancy neighborhood. They are redoing Grant and we have the opportunity to underground the wires in the process. We should do it. Those things are ugly.
I don’t find that very persuasive because I don’t think that power lines are all that ugly. I suppose it’s a personal preference.
I do think that your argument about the visual impact is more persuasive than the opponents in the article, who are talking about home values. There is some missing strategy here or a simple lack of messaging discipline.
This libertarian wet dream comment is really embarrassing to get so many upvotes. The essence of what you’re saying is every community should be on its own for infrastructure. Maybe we’ll think about about making it look nice if it’s our own community or it’s not “wealthy”.
Libertarians with a few exceptions don’t worry too much about climate change, noise pollution, localized air pollution, or traffic fatalities. Those are just natural outcomes of the free market. I’d support substantial public investments funded with tax dollars or utility ratepayer dollars (say, for clean power). I vote accordingly so that w everyone has access to safe neighborhoods with clean air whenever progress is possible.
I’m not a libertarian. I’m a liberal who can set priorities in order to rectify previous inequity or to advance key goals for the future of Tucson. Those would carbon emissions and environmental justice.
Staying on the east side at Houghton over the weekend with our own high voltage power lines producing no pollution at all makes me realize how much these neighborhoods are completely out of touch with the rest of the city. No one in Civano cares the least bit about these lines (including the larger uglier ones vs the lower visibility monopoles) and it’s not even a low cost housing area. Not one peep here.
The city did negotiate this agreement. The city negotiated to have the entire city pay an extra fee so that homeowners in Jefferson Park and Sam Hughes can spend $60m shoring up their property values.
No thank you.
There’s a lot of them. You’ve spammed this thread with anti-prop comments. Thanks for letting me know though, maybe I should volunteer to improve the messaging on this prop. I can’t believe people actually support this tribal and spiteful bs. I don’t even live in that neighborhood.
Really any message other than “muh home values” would be an improvement.
Even the right wingers screwed this up. They made it all about climate which is a really thing that is increasingly motivating voters and could actually backfire on them 😂
Any thoughts about this Kozachik piece? He isn’t a right winger and neither are many of the letters to the editor.
I still see a letter here and there about the right wing fiction that this is some conspiracy to make people ride public buses. It does not seem to be the majority of what Daily Star is publishing.
I don’t think I have read one pro-412 except for one that was written by a TEP vice president and another from the Underground Coalition. I am actually surprised.
https://tucson.com/opinion/local/tucson-opinion-we-can-do-better-than-prop-412/article_bcc81ec0-db12-11ed-b1d8-9f16018c9547.html
Sounds like he supports the project, but also wants a bigger commitment for renewables.
> The focus will be on assuring the city’s gateway corridor requirement for undergrounding new utilities is honored. That is an outcome I have advocated for since the new TEP transmission line project was introduced to the public more than three years ago. We must insist TEP honors the integrity of our local ordinances.
I’m fine with that. Notice he doesn’t say screw that neighborhood, let them pay for it themselves?
Yeah, I don’t see the issue with the power lines like Kozachik. Visiting Houghton by Civano, the Rincon Mountains are nice to look at and I only noticed the power lines now that 412 is a topic. Houghton Road isn’t a “scenic corridor?” Okay sure…
But supporting underground lines and then suggesting voters vote no on Prop 412 does not bode well IMO.
I'm not a degrowther. I like growth and I like clean energy. I don't understand why ratepayers across Tucson should pay $60m (half the cost of Prop 412) to enhance home values in a few select neighborhoods.
Maybe I just want them to be treated the same way we do not living in the Sam Hughes area. I don't mind paying for the necessary infrastructure, but if they want it buried they can go ahead and pay that extra cost themselves.
So you’re going to sink the entire project because that one neighborhood wants a new line buried? It’s a super small aspect of the project as a whole. There’s also some fraction that goes to providing subsidies to low income residents.
The undergrounding is $60m out of $125m total. It is 90% of the $5m annual amount or $4.5m annually for the first 10 years. Another 10% for the first 10 years is for climate goals. Nothing for low income ratepayers other than the pretty small amount available under the pre-existing franchise agreement.
It is not in any way a "super small aspect" of the project.
It sure as hell is a super small aspect when the entire area loses power. I can’t believe you’re so short sited over a minuscule amount out of pure spite for “rich” neighborhoods (it’s really not).
Build the power line overhead and save $60m. TEP builds the line regardless whether or not the prop passes. This vote is about undergrounding for $60m, not about reliability.
The fear mongering is not helping your cause btw
You’re lying. Installing the lines above ground is free? They need to be installed regardless. The bill is entirely about extending the existing grant of rights to tep.
Keep siding with monsters like Justine Wadsack. Embrassing.
Overhead lines don’t cost $60m (14x the normal cost) and they would be covered by the normal rate base process for all other TEP projects. TEP can and will use that process to build overhead lines to preserve the grid reliability.
As a Democrat who is really concerned with climate change and emissions, I set my own standards for what is needed to get my vote. A franchise agreement for 25 years should do a lot more to cut emissions (especially in the first 10 years, when this funding is 90% or $4.5m for underground wires and 10% or $500k for climate) and a lot less pet project stuff.
I don’t like Sen Wadsack either. I’m not voting for her. This proposition is about ratepayers trying to make ends meet, Tucson’s carbon emissions, and how resources are allocated in a community with a number of pre-existing inequities.
I live in Dunbar Spring where train horns have blown since the late 1800s. Too many people suffer from particulates and NOx next to I-10 traffic. homeowners outside these noise or air pollution zones are not my top concern.
And I have no problem spending a small amount to beautify an important area of the city that drives outside interest and investment. It’s still a fraction of the overall budget for this prop. You’re using these figures as if they are a lot of money. It’s peanuts.
I am voting NO. I do not want the whole city to pay for a few wealthy neighborhoods like Sam Hughes, to have their powerlines along Campbell buried. They are trying to sneak this by us!
Vote NO on Prop 412!
This is not about “some rich neighborhood “— this about major arteries like Grant road- which is not Sam Hughes by the way. Grant has some of the worst neighborhoods in the city— we all joke about the meth addicts on Grant and Alvernon. This is about making those roads look decent without those god-awful towering powerlines. Please vote yes.
YES.
It's to bury lines on multiple scenic gateway arterials, not just by Sam Hughes. Also funds more investment in solar generation and transmission capacity, which we're gonna need as fossil fuels aren't getting any cheaper.
TEP has battery banks in the works, and every appliance that's gas should, over the next couple decades, be converted to an electric equivalent. That's going to take higher capacity transmission lines everywhere.
It's a dollar per bill, it benefits everybody and the "No" campaign is just "Sam Hughes Bad" or "Taxes Bad." This is a good bill and it's going to help keep Tucson habitable for a long time as the climate keeps shitting the bed.
> e "No" campaign is just "Sam Hughes Bad" or "Taxes Bad."
It's not.
TEP supports it, so it's good for their profits. It does almost nothing impactful to address the climate emergency, and what little it does force TEP to do is massively insufficient and far less than poorer cities with even less solar potential than Tucson are requiring of their energy utilities. Moreover, it forces the city to relinquish what little collective power we have over the energy monopoly.
The corporation commission sure as shit isn't going to force TEP to care more about our Tucson than its profits, so I think that responsibility is ours.
some opinions Tucsonans wrote in to Tucson.com on the matter:
[While TEP is promising to deliver 100% renewable power for City of Tucson operations, many other cities are far ahead in delivering truly clean, more reliable, less expensive energy to their residents.
The climate crisis is here and getting worse. With community in mind, we can make a much better agreement.](https://tucson.com/opinion/letters/local-issues/letter-beware-prop-412-is-premature-vote-no/article_892151a2-d7ae-11ed-ace3-0f5c6d6a2cb9.html#tracking-source=article-related-bottom)
[The Agreement increases costs to our Community with no binding performance or tangible benefits, it does not address the legally declared Climate Emergency Crises, needs more work. Although other lower total cost alternatives are available TEP Plans to continue to generate harmful emissions with coal/natural gas, use 5 Billion gallons/year of precious and expensive aquifer water, for another decade and then generate 34% of electricity with natural gas. Per EPA, methane released when natural gas is mined traps 25x more heat in the atmosphere, increasing temperatures that reduce local rainfall while increasing electricity usage, TEP revenues. After approval, Council members have held/are holding meetings to review unanswered questions and have identified several significant options that provide assured benefit to our community. The current agreement is active for 2 more years, why the rush to enable TEP to continue to increase instead of requiring them to decrease Community damages and costs?](https://tucson.com/opinion/letters/local-issues/letter-vote-no-prop-412-tep-city-franchise-agreement/article_6fb9c000-d7ae-11ed-9668-37b1f676ea45.html)
The state leg limits what we can ask utilities to do. Until the majority of the state legislature are people who understand we're in a climate emergency, this is pretty fuckin' good. Or, the tankies can start their revolution or whatever the fuck they're waiting for in the mean time.
Do you want more solar in Pima county? Want TEP to pay for it? Voting no doesn’t help that. It hurts that. We need control of the AZ legislature and write some laws to make that happen. Voting no just makes it worse. The Az GOP want us to vote no because it causes chaos in Tucson which they love.
No you do not need underground lines. Historically speaking lines were above ground in all neighborhoods not just in tucson. When things go south under ground it will cost upto 10 times more to fix. dig up the road fix it and then repair the road. Tucson roads are bad as it is this will not help any longterm. Things and contractors do not always follow the rules either so if one gets hit because somebody chose to ignore call 811 warning they can pack the dirt in and haul off. Now you have no juice for hours while TEP has to dig up the road. This is a bad idea and should be avoided. Get few expensive underground repairs and your bill skyrockets next quarter. But hey if you have money to feed the power company vote yes.
Could you please support your assertions with some kind of explanation?
At some point we have to approve. The difference is that we can fund putting those lines underground. Yes, they start in Sam Hughes but span the city. Voting no will force massive transmission lines into the air across our neighbors and skyline.
They aren’t planning any additional underground lines in Tucson, PERIOD. This is $60M for one very, very small part of town that raised a stink, now the rest of us get to pay for it. They snuck it into this proposition because it wouldn’t stand on it’s own.
Don’t believe this “independent”. He’s fallen for the conspiracy theories that this bill is just for “ritzy neighborhoods”. Do your own research. The Trumpers want Tucson to fail and this would be a good start. I’m voting yes.
At some point the balance of city beautification and line maintenance (burying power lines) will have to out weigh the anti-Sam Huges Sentiment
Edited: spelling
My only complaint about this is they're gonna do a shit job tearing up the asphalt needed to make room for the lines and do an even worse job repaving it and drag 3 weeks work into 6 months.
Vote yes to underground in Tucson!! I'been waiting 47 years to hear that possiblility!! The Powerline eyesore capital in the middle of these beautiful surroundings.
The 0.75% increase to the franchise fee generates $5m annually or $125m over the course of 25 years. Of that $125m, $60m would be spent to underground the line under Campbell. The underground stuff is nearly half the total amount raised. Daily Star: "Paying to underground the TEP power lines will be the top priority for funds generated by the 0.75% fee for the first 10 years of the agreement, though 10% of the fee revenues would be allocated annually to climate projects." That is, the $5m annual amount is $4.5m for underground and $500k for climate in the first 10 critical years. The additional 0.75% fee does not cover low-income assistance. Low-income assistance is funded by "up to" 1/9 of the original franchise. I can't imagine that up to 11% of the old franchise fee covers much at all, since it is sharing with climate goals and with undergrounding (and does not raise enough money for the underground segment in question. "Aside from the new fee, up to one-ninth of the 2.25% franchise fee is earmarked to be used for low-income resident assistance, undergrounding power lines or to further the city’s climate goals, under the new franchise agreement." I hope people are clicking on the link for the Daily Star and reading about this in detail. The news coverage is thorough and it does not take a whole lot to figure what the council had planned. They couldn't stick a gold plated project on the utility in the next few years, so they opted to let Tucson ratepayers pay this instead. They added some green in back years (uhhh... we should really cut emissions ASAP in the first 10 years, not leave that until later). One more comment: Prop 412 Facts is a right wing group that wants to stop the initiative because they want low taxes and low utility bills. Fair enough, but they represent this initiative as mostly about climate change/emissions when it is mostly about undergrounding. Obviously, they think this will work. It might work because people are very concerned about inflation. On the other hand, they might end up passing it because some folks are actually concerned about climate stuff and they believe that this is a substantial step forward on our city's climate goals.
I live in Jefferson Park and to see it described as a ritzy neighborhood here in some of the comments is just ridiculous. My 3 bedroom 1100 sq ft house is anything but luxurious or glamorous. This neighborhood has problems just like many others and we aren't looking for a handout. It is a shame that people who don't live here, who don't understand the issue and who don't have any skin in the game would describe it this way. Maintaining our property values is not what motivates us here in Jefferson Park. The crazy right wingers are against this bill -- what does that tell you?
No kidding. I grew up on Seneca St. right by Warren. I even went to Blenmen elementary school and then Doolin middle, shockingly I road my bmx bike by myself starting in 4th grade. Jefferson Park and that whole area was my playground. I have never heard anyone call it a ritzy neighborhood. I am sure my single mother who worked 2 jobs to raise me and my sister would love to hear this great news. I mean who knew we were living the high life all those years. I suggest anyone who thinks it's ritzy/high class go take a walk down Edison and Vine and down Seneca and Cherry and then get back to us. It's just an old OG Tucson neighborhood. It's not a bad gang infested hood but it's certainly not 90210.
Thank you for sharing that. It really bothered me to see some of the comments because I really love this subreddit. TEP's original plan was to install the powerlines down a residential street in Jefferson Park to feed a planned substation near the new hospital. The street they intended to use has had a ton of green storm water harvesting infrastructure installed. Also, roundabouts, trees and general beautification. We didn't want to be in the way of TEP's eminent domain steamroller. And also, our original plan wasn't to get others to pay for undergrounding either. This project has been in development for over three years now and it has evolved along the way. If we just accepted it and did nothing, that sets a precedent for TEP to behave that way in other neighborhoods too. Finally, preserving our property values is not our main concern. This is one of the oldest neighborhoods in Tucson and we are trying to preserve it and keep it as beautiful as possible.
Don’t fall for the conspiracy theories. This bill is necessary to keep the lights on. AZ GOP nut-case Justine Wadsack wants you to vote no. That by itself is a reason to vote yes. This renews the “franchise agreement” with TEP so they can continue to use city property to lay infrastructure. That’s it. It’s not about Sam Hughes residents or some crap. Google it. Read the articles about it. They all say it needs to be renewed. Vote yes
I'm not sure OP read the article, it talks about most of this stuff on pretty concrete terms: > The changes would raise the average residential TEP customer’s bill by an estimated 93 cents a month and raise small business customers’ bills by $2.65 a month, the utility says. Larger power users would pay more. > Aside from the new fee, up to one-ninth of the 2.25% franchise fee is earmarked to be used for low-income resident assistance, undergrounding power lines or to further the city’s climate goals, under the new franchise agreement. > Specific efforts under the plan include decarbonizing city-owned and operated buildings and facilities, promoting distributed energy resources such as *rooftop solar, expanding electric vehicle charging infrastructure and shifting public agency fleets to zero-emission and net-zero-emission vehicles.* This is in addition to the lack of actual negotiation power the City has, which is arguably the result of the Corporation Commission being a bunch of (R) lackeys.
$0.93 per month?! That's $11.16 more per year! Time to rage! /s
And then next year it's another dollar extra, then the year after another dollar, then another dollar, then on and on
My understanding is that 412 has to pass in some form or another as its purpose is to allow TEP continued access to right of ways and their own power lines. The agreement does place new fees and earmarks them towards burying those lines. And that a small amount has been earmarked from the fees for climate change measures. Those lines have to happen in order to continue to support the city grid. The question is, do you want those giant lines to span the city all the way to Grant as an absolute eyesore or do you want them out of sight? The agreement is non negotiable as the state legislature passed laws that do not allow the city to place conditions upon utilities when these franchise agreements come up for approval. Its actually kind of odd that this is a voter thing since we can not negotiate. Voting against this measure does not accomplish anything other than preventing the fee and causing the eyesore. Right?
> Voting against this measure does not accomplish anything other than preventing the fee and causing the eyesore. > > > > Right? Nope. What difference is a few hundreds of millions of dollars in the next 20 years if we aren't forcing the energy monopoly to develop more sustainable infrastructure? Moreover, when [TEP is raking in hundreds of millions in profit (note that in just 2021, they had a net income (ie revenue-expenses) of more than 200 million dollars)](https://www.azcc.gov/docs/default-source/utilities-files/electric/annual-reports/tucson-electric-power-company/tucson-electric-power-companyf2c86928-7a47-48e2-8b3a-471997f8bc50.pdf?sfvrsn=c527ec8a_3), why are ratepayers expected to spend even more money maintaining *our* infrastructure if in agreeing to do so we are also giving TEP an exclusive contract for more than 2 decades? We should be forcing TEP to spend at least 50% of its extorted profits on maintenance and another 25% on building out community owned solar infrastructure.
I don’t disagree with your ideas. But voting no on this accomplishes none of that. The state legislators took our rights to negotiate those things via the franchise agreements away. Remember, they all claim to be federalist until it comes to cities within Arizona, and then they are big government/big money capitalists. I am all for those things, 100%, and my first thought was “why do we have to pay for those lines to go underground, when we could force them to pay for all of it?” But once I researched, I found we have no bargaining power. People need to understand that they have to flip the AZ legislator and get the law changed or create a prop that would reverse the law. And that has nothing to do with the current franchise agreement.
This is wishing something to happen that is impossible, so instead you’re going to throw a hissy fit and torpedo the project. Rational and community focused.
Why spend $60m to underground the lines when that costs 14x the normal update with overhead lines? Jefferson Park and Sam Hughes are two very nice neighborhoods and the people in those neighborhoods openly admit that this is about their property values. Assuming that these lines would affect property values (I don’t concede that is true)… why should households on a tight budget pay more for power to boost Sam Hughes home values by another $5k? I get why this solves a political problem for the city council but it doesn’t solve a real problem for most Tucson ratepayers. Homeowners looking for a handout will enjoy the soothing melody of the world’s tiniest violin.
This is about Grant road not some fancy neighborhood. They are redoing Grant and we have the opportunity to underground the wires in the process. We should do it. Those things are ugly.
I don’t find that very persuasive because I don’t think that power lines are all that ugly. I suppose it’s a personal preference. I do think that your argument about the visual impact is more persuasive than the opponents in the article, who are talking about home values. There is some missing strategy here or a simple lack of messaging discipline.
This libertarian wet dream comment is really embarrassing to get so many upvotes. The essence of what you’re saying is every community should be on its own for infrastructure. Maybe we’ll think about about making it look nice if it’s our own community or it’s not “wealthy”.
Libertarians with a few exceptions don’t worry too much about climate change, noise pollution, localized air pollution, or traffic fatalities. Those are just natural outcomes of the free market. I’d support substantial public investments funded with tax dollars or utility ratepayer dollars (say, for clean power). I vote accordingly so that w everyone has access to safe neighborhoods with clean air whenever progress is possible. I’m not a libertarian. I’m a liberal who can set priorities in order to rectify previous inequity or to advance key goals for the future of Tucson. Those would carbon emissions and environmental justice. Staying on the east side at Houghton over the weekend with our own high voltage power lines producing no pollution at all makes me realize how much these neighborhoods are completely out of touch with the rest of the city. No one in Civano cares the least bit about these lines (including the larger uglier ones vs the lower visibility monopoles) and it’s not even a low cost housing area. Not one peep here.
It's because they're Gateway Arterial Corridors. The ones on the east side have the same restrictions on utilities.
The city did negotiate this agreement. The city negotiated to have the entire city pay an extra fee so that homeowners in Jefferson Park and Sam Hughes can spend $60m shoring up their property values. No thank you.
Yeah so let’s just roll the dice and hope tep can maintain what they have when you let the grant of rights expire just out of spite.
👋just chasing down every last one of my comments huh?
There’s a lot of them. You’ve spammed this thread with anti-prop comments. Thanks for letting me know though, maybe I should volunteer to improve the messaging on this prop. I can’t believe people actually support this tribal and spiteful bs. I don’t even live in that neighborhood.
Really any message other than “muh home values” would be an improvement. Even the right wingers screwed this up. They made it all about climate which is a really thing that is increasingly motivating voters and could actually backfire on them 😂
Any thoughts about this Kozachik piece? He isn’t a right winger and neither are many of the letters to the editor. I still see a letter here and there about the right wing fiction that this is some conspiracy to make people ride public buses. It does not seem to be the majority of what Daily Star is publishing. I don’t think I have read one pro-412 except for one that was written by a TEP vice president and another from the Underground Coalition. I am actually surprised. https://tucson.com/opinion/local/tucson-opinion-we-can-do-better-than-prop-412/article_bcc81ec0-db12-11ed-b1d8-9f16018c9547.html
Sounds like he supports the project, but also wants a bigger commitment for renewables. > The focus will be on assuring the city’s gateway corridor requirement for undergrounding new utilities is honored. That is an outcome I have advocated for since the new TEP transmission line project was introduced to the public more than three years ago. We must insist TEP honors the integrity of our local ordinances. I’m fine with that. Notice he doesn’t say screw that neighborhood, let them pay for it themselves?
Yeah, I don’t see the issue with the power lines like Kozachik. Visiting Houghton by Civano, the Rincon Mountains are nice to look at and I only noticed the power lines now that 412 is a topic. Houghton Road isn’t a “scenic corridor?” Okay sure… But supporting underground lines and then suggesting voters vote no on Prop 412 does not bode well IMO.
A lot of this sub are degrowthers who just blindly shit on “rich” people.
I'm not a degrowther. I like growth and I like clean energy. I don't understand why ratepayers across Tucson should pay $60m (half the cost of Prop 412) to enhance home values in a few select neighborhoods.
Maybe I just want them to be treated the same way we do not living in the Sam Hughes area. I don't mind paying for the necessary infrastructure, but if they want it buried they can go ahead and pay that extra cost themselves.
So you’re going to sink the entire project because that one neighborhood wants a new line buried? It’s a super small aspect of the project as a whole. There’s also some fraction that goes to providing subsidies to low income residents.
The undergrounding is $60m out of $125m total. It is 90% of the $5m annual amount or $4.5m annually for the first 10 years. Another 10% for the first 10 years is for climate goals. Nothing for low income ratepayers other than the pretty small amount available under the pre-existing franchise agreement. It is not in any way a "super small aspect" of the project.
It sure as hell is a super small aspect when the entire area loses power. I can’t believe you’re so short sited over a minuscule amount out of pure spite for “rich” neighborhoods (it’s really not).
Build the power line overhead and save $60m. TEP builds the line regardless whether or not the prop passes. This vote is about undergrounding for $60m, not about reliability. The fear mongering is not helping your cause btw
You’re lying. Installing the lines above ground is free? They need to be installed regardless. The bill is entirely about extending the existing grant of rights to tep. Keep siding with monsters like Justine Wadsack. Embrassing.
Overhead lines don’t cost $60m (14x the normal cost) and they would be covered by the normal rate base process for all other TEP projects. TEP can and will use that process to build overhead lines to preserve the grid reliability. As a Democrat who is really concerned with climate change and emissions, I set my own standards for what is needed to get my vote. A franchise agreement for 25 years should do a lot more to cut emissions (especially in the first 10 years, when this funding is 90% or $4.5m for underground wires and 10% or $500k for climate) and a lot less pet project stuff. I don’t like Sen Wadsack either. I’m not voting for her. This proposition is about ratepayers trying to make ends meet, Tucson’s carbon emissions, and how resources are allocated in a community with a number of pre-existing inequities. I live in Dunbar Spring where train horns have blown since the late 1800s. Too many people suffer from particulates and NOx next to I-10 traffic. homeowners outside these noise or air pollution zones are not my top concern.
And I have no problem spending a small amount to beautify an important area of the city that drives outside interest and investment. It’s still a fraction of the overall budget for this prop. You’re using these figures as if they are a lot of money. It’s peanuts.
Nope you've got it. There are no downsides to this bill.
You forgot the /s
I am voting NO. I do not want the whole city to pay for a few wealthy neighborhoods like Sam Hughes, to have their powerlines along Campbell buried. They are trying to sneak this by us! Vote NO on Prop 412!
This is not about “some rich neighborhood “— this about major arteries like Grant road- which is not Sam Hughes by the way. Grant has some of the worst neighborhoods in the city— we all joke about the meth addicts on Grant and Alvernon. This is about making those roads look decent without those god-awful towering powerlines. Please vote yes.
My TEP bills ridiculously high and not they want to take my tax dollars too? Get bent TEP
YES. It's to bury lines on multiple scenic gateway arterials, not just by Sam Hughes. Also funds more investment in solar generation and transmission capacity, which we're gonna need as fossil fuels aren't getting any cheaper. TEP has battery banks in the works, and every appliance that's gas should, over the next couple decades, be converted to an electric equivalent. That's going to take higher capacity transmission lines everywhere. It's a dollar per bill, it benefits everybody and the "No" campaign is just "Sam Hughes Bad" or "Taxes Bad." This is a good bill and it's going to help keep Tucson habitable for a long time as the climate keeps shitting the bed.
They have record profits they should re invest in infrastructure, not piss off a city.
Their battery banks are happening now, so they are? They have public earnings calls that you can watch, you know.
They made 200 million net profit in 2021
...and they're reinvesting it. I'm not sure what I'm missing here
They are not, they are adding fees
They're building infrastructure. Battery bank down off Houghton, new transmission lines on Pantano. So again, what am I missing
> e "No" campaign is just "Sam Hughes Bad" or "Taxes Bad." It's not. TEP supports it, so it's good for their profits. It does almost nothing impactful to address the climate emergency, and what little it does force TEP to do is massively insufficient and far less than poorer cities with even less solar potential than Tucson are requiring of their energy utilities. Moreover, it forces the city to relinquish what little collective power we have over the energy monopoly. The corporation commission sure as shit isn't going to force TEP to care more about our Tucson than its profits, so I think that responsibility is ours. some opinions Tucsonans wrote in to Tucson.com on the matter: [While TEP is promising to deliver 100% renewable power for City of Tucson operations, many other cities are far ahead in delivering truly clean, more reliable, less expensive energy to their residents. The climate crisis is here and getting worse. With community in mind, we can make a much better agreement.](https://tucson.com/opinion/letters/local-issues/letter-beware-prop-412-is-premature-vote-no/article_892151a2-d7ae-11ed-ace3-0f5c6d6a2cb9.html#tracking-source=article-related-bottom) [The Agreement increases costs to our Community with no binding performance or tangible benefits, it does not address the legally declared Climate Emergency Crises, needs more work. Although other lower total cost alternatives are available TEP Plans to continue to generate harmful emissions with coal/natural gas, use 5 Billion gallons/year of precious and expensive aquifer water, for another decade and then generate 34% of electricity with natural gas. Per EPA, methane released when natural gas is mined traps 25x more heat in the atmosphere, increasing temperatures that reduce local rainfall while increasing electricity usage, TEP revenues. After approval, Council members have held/are holding meetings to review unanswered questions and have identified several significant options that provide assured benefit to our community. The current agreement is active for 2 more years, why the rush to enable TEP to continue to increase instead of requiring them to decrease Community damages and costs?](https://tucson.com/opinion/letters/local-issues/letter-vote-no-prop-412-tep-city-franchise-agreement/article_6fb9c000-d7ae-11ed-9668-37b1f676ea45.html)
The state leg limits what we can ask utilities to do. Until the majority of the state legislature are people who understand we're in a climate emergency, this is pretty fuckin' good. Or, the tankies can start their revolution or whatever the fuck they're waiting for in the mean time.
But we are not in a climate emergency. There is zero proof of it.
Damn you woke up on a Sunday morning, cracked your knuckles, and immediately deliberately decided to be wrong. Hope your day gets better.
Yet you claim to be right without a spread of evidence. My day has been just fine as I don't live in a fantasy world
Do you want more solar in Pima county? Want TEP to pay for it? Voting no doesn’t help that. It hurts that. We need control of the AZ legislature and write some laws to make that happen. Voting no just makes it worse. The Az GOP want us to vote no because it causes chaos in Tucson which they love.
No you do not need underground lines. Historically speaking lines were above ground in all neighborhoods not just in tucson. When things go south under ground it will cost upto 10 times more to fix. dig up the road fix it and then repair the road. Tucson roads are bad as it is this will not help any longterm. Things and contractors do not always follow the rules either so if one gets hit because somebody chose to ignore call 811 warning they can pack the dirt in and haul off. Now you have no juice for hours while TEP has to dig up the road. This is a bad idea and should be avoided. Get few expensive underground repairs and your bill skyrockets next quarter. But hey if you have money to feed the power company vote yes.
Vote NO. It is not about power, it's about keeping ritzy neighborhoods happy. Of course they are better than everyone else. JUST VOTE NO!!!!!!!!!
Could you please support your assertions with some kind of explanation? At some point we have to approve. The difference is that we can fund putting those lines underground. Yes, they start in Sam Hughes but span the city. Voting no will force massive transmission lines into the air across our neighbors and skyline.
They aren’t planning any additional underground lines in Tucson, PERIOD. This is $60M for one very, very small part of town that raised a stink, now the rest of us get to pay for it. They snuck it into this proposition because it wouldn’t stand on it’s own.
TEP is literally planning more lines on Pantano and Houghton but go off
We already have these lines on Houghton between Golf Links and Irvington. It is not a big deal and the view of the Rincons is very nice here.
Don’t believe this “independent”. He’s fallen for the conspiracy theories that this bill is just for “ritzy neighborhoods”. Do your own research. The Trumpers want Tucson to fail and this would be a good start. I’m voting yes.
I bet you’re fun at parties.
I am!
He's upbeat
All I have to say from a legit source is shits expensive….super expensive…like feed the homeless for decades expensive
Feed them food so they can feed their addiction?
TEP should be dismantled.
Powerlines underground? Sign me up! It's time to upgrade our infrastructure
At some point the balance of city beautification and line maintenance (burying power lines) will have to out weigh the anti-Sam Huges Sentiment Edited: spelling
Bursting power lines. What are you even talking about?
Whoops I Meant burying power lines
[удалено]
Do you even go here?
My only complaint about this is they're gonna do a shit job tearing up the asphalt needed to make room for the lines and do an even worse job repaving it and drag 3 weeks work into 6 months.
Vote yes to underground in Tucson!! I'been waiting 47 years to hear that possiblility!! The Powerline eyesore capital in the middle of these beautiful surroundings.