Lawmakers at the Arizona Capitol want to require the state’s utility companies to prepare plans to reduce wildfire risks across the state, but critics argue the bill’s fine print will actually make it harder for residents to hold power companies accountable when they cause those fires.
Rep. Gail Griffin’s proposal would require power utilities across the state to submit wildfire mitigation plans to oversight authorities like the Arizona Corporation Commission every two years starting in 2026.
But Griffin’s proposal also includes multiple significant changes to state law that change the liability those utilities face if they cause a wildfire.
“And the reason why we're opposed to the bill, because this is one of the most aggressive liability prevention bills that we've seen in any of the states,” said Marc Osborn, an insurance company lobbyist.
He pointed to clauses barring residents from bringing class action lawsuits or seeking punitive damages in court if they believe a utilities’ negligence resulted in a fire that damaged their home or other property.
“Punitive damages are usually designed to kind of punish the really bad actors,” Osborn said, pointing to the Labor Day fires in Oregon in 2020. A jury found PacifiCorp was negligent for failing to cut power to hundreds of thousands of customers following warning from fire officials, a decision expected to cost the utility billions of dollars.
Griffin's bill leaves the decision to cut power to at-risk lines solely in a utilities' hands.

And representatives for insurance companies said Griffin’s bill would significantly increase the burden of proof needed to claim any damages in a suit against utilities following a wildfire while failing to include enough accountability to ensure a utility’s mitigation plan is sufficient or even being followed.
“And so we think that the bill that eliminates essentially any and all recourse against utility is not reasonable,” said Laura Curtis, who represents the American Property Casualty Insurance Association.
Griffin (R-Hereford) said those concerns are overblown, citing a letter of support signed by some current and former officials, including Show Low Mayor John Leech and John Larson, former director Arizona Department of Forestry and Fire Management
“Utilities are accountable for anything that they do that is in error, and they are responsible if they're at fault,” she said.
The bill’s supporters argued it is needed to prevent utilities – and ultimately their ratepayers – from footing the bill to deal with circumstances outside of their control.
For instance, Rep. Teresa Martinez (R-Casa Grande) blamed the federal government – which owns 39% of land in Arizona – for failing to do enough to mitigate wildfires on its land.
“If a fire breaks out … then all of a sudden, we're left with pieces of land in the state of Arizona that the federal government has left uncleaned, lack of a better word, and yet, the utilities are forced to take the brunt of it all,” Martinez said.
She argued utilities don’t need any new incentives to maintain their infrastructure and property.
“They want to preserve their equipment and infrastructure for as long as they can. It's not good business to be negligent, at least not in Arizona, it's not,” she said, noting that insurance companies can, and do, drop customer coverage in risky areas while utilities must continue service to all residents.

Still, according to the Western Fire Chiefs Association, 19% of wildfires were caused by power networks as overall fire risk has increased due to climate change.
According to the support letter, supporters argue the bill will create uniform wildfire mitigation requirements for all utilities while including “common sense liability reforms.”
But those reforms could be unconstitutional.
Rep. Rachel Keshel (R-Tucson) expressed concern the bill could violate the Arizona Constitution’s anti-abrogation clause, which essentially says the Legislature cannot take away any right to sue in court that existed when Arizona became a state.
An attorney for APS, the state’s largest utility, argued the proposal doesn’t violate that clause.
“You've heard a lot of folks come up here today and say that this eliminates all ability to to use the courts for redress in the case of wildfire, and nothing could be further from the truth,” APS attorney Jeff Allmon said, arguing the bill seeks to regulate, not eliminate, the claims process.
The bill passed the Arizona House’s Land, Agriculture & Rural Affairs Committee 5-2 on a party line vote. Keshel, who chose not to cast a vote, was the only Republican on the committee who did not support it.
-
Scottsdale’s Hunkapi Farms is providing safe haven for horses from Southern California. The owner and volunteers want to go back and help even more of them.
-
Animal shelters in California transferred several pets to Arizona as a result of the effects of the Los Angeles wildfires. The Arizona Humane Society received 21 dogs.
-
The Forest Service in northern Arizona suspended a prescribed burn southwest of the city due to strong winds in the area.
-
Coconino County officials have approved $12 million in funding to finish a series of flood control measures put in place after a devastating fire nearly three years ago east of Flagstaff.
-
Watching the wildfires devastate a major U.S. city has many of us wondering: Could it happen here? Research shows our ecosystem is changing, making us more at risk to wildfire than ever before.