There’s a clear takeaway from this year’s Salt River Project election: efforts by Turning Point to push the utility toward expanded fossil fuel reliance didn’t work. Despite a well-organized (and expensive) push from Turning Point USA to get anti renewable people on the Board, SRP voters told them to pound sand.
The SRP board now has an 8–6 majority of members who support expanding clean energy resources. That matters. SRP is one of the largest public power utilities in the country, and board composition directly shapes long-term decisions about generation (and who pays for it), infrastructure investments, and ratepayer costs.
The clean energy slate performed strongly in what are called the ‘at-large’ races. Candidates like Krista O’Brien and Kathy Mohr Almeida smoked the Turning Point candidates… doubling their vote totals.
The only races the clean energy slate lost were the president and vice president positions because those races are based on the antiquated and unfair acreage-based voting system. Under that system if you have 400 acres of land in the SRP area you get 400 votes. If you live on a ¼ acre property you only get 0.25 votes.
Even with fossil enthusiasts in the officer positions the result is dramatic. An 8–6 majority is enough to move policy discussions in a new direction. It doesn’t guarantee good outcomes, but it does mean proposals for more large-scale fossil fuel investments will face more scrutiny than they have in the past.
That’s especially important given pressures to make residential rate payers pay for the infrastructure to feed data centers. One of the biggest concerns heading into this election was whether residential ratepayers would be asked to subsidize expensive new fossil fuel infrastructure to support those loads. With the new board composition, that kind of “rubber stamp” approach is less likely.
Going forward, attention will shift to how the board engages with SRP leadership, including CEO Jim Pratt. Expect more pressure to evaluate lower-cost renewable options like solar, storage, and energy efficiency and less on ‘reliability’ (e.g., methane plants) rather than cleaner energy development.
This is something to celebrate, which is why I led with this piece this week! Some of the rest of my update are a drag… like this next one.






