Corporation Commission to pay for attorney to seek utility records

But how far they are willing to let Commissioner Bob Burns go with his legal battle to find out what the utility is spending to influence elections — and how much they’re willing to spend — remains undecided.

Officially, the 4-1 vote has no limit on what would come out of the budget of the Arizona Corporation Commission.

Commissioner Tom Forese had proposed an initial cap of $100,000, with a promise to revisit the issue when that money ran out. Commission Chair Doug Little said that made sense. He did not want a blank check, saying APS has indicated it would take its fight to shield its political donations from commission and public eyes as far as it needs.

“I don’t think it is prudent or appropriate to simply write a blank check to put us potentially on the hook for legal fees that might extend up to and including a Supreme Court deal,” Little said. And he said if Burns lost his legal battle, the state could end up having to pick up the tab for the utility’s attorneys, too.

But Burns argued that any pre-determined figure would effectively tie his hands and assure he would lose the lawsuit, as the state’s largest utility company and its parent have deep pockets and could simply drag the case on until funding for his own lawyer ran out.

Commissioner Andy Tobin sided with Burns in pushing authorization to hire an attorney without a pre-set cap.

Tobin noted the commission has previously hired outside counsel for individual commissioners.

That includes a $90,000 bill to let Susan Bitter Smith try to fight charges she was holding office illegally, and $130,000 to help Bob Stump stave off efforts by an outside group to get access to the texts from his cell phone.

And in both cases, there was no pre-set cap.

But Tobin said Thursday’s vote is not the kind of “blank check” that Little and Forese oppose. He said if the litigation appears to be going nowhere or a trial judge rules against Burns, the commission can decide at that time to cut its losses.

With that condition, Forese and Little agreed to go along; Stump did not.

The quest for the attorney stems from a subpoena Burns issued to have APS and Pinnacle West provide him with various documents.

He’s particularly interested in learning what they have spent on past political races and whether they are the source of any of the $3.2 million in “dark money” anonymous donations used by outside groups to help elect Forese and Little.

An attorney for APS questioned Burns’ authority to seek much of what he wants and refused to turn over some documents.

The company then filed suit in Maricopa County Superior Court asking a judge to quash the subpoena.

A hearing is set for next month.

The commission’s own legal staff cannot represent Burns because his interests in getting the documents are at odds with his colleagues, who have questioned both the need for the information as well as the legal authority.

Burns said since he issued the subpoena as an elected official, the commission is obligated to find him an outside counsel to defend his action.