The Society of St. Vincent de Paul recently held a ribbon-cutting ceremony for a new temporary housing facility. The facility will offer accommodations for 100 unhoused seniors, veterans, and adults with disabilities, along with an animal clinic by Midwestern University and a program aimed at assisting transitional housing residents in securing stable employment.

“As De Paul Manor opens its doors, it marks the launch of exceptional services and resources available to our neighbors in need,” said Chuck Carefoot, Ryan Companies southwest region president. “The completion of this project highlights our team and partners dedication to creating a transformative housing facility that will benefit vulnerable individuals and animals in our community.” 

The Workforce Development Program will aid SVdP residents to help acquire the required skills to get stable employment. 

De Paul Manor will offer beds for 100 unhoused veterans, seniors, and adults with disabilities. The newly revamped manor is modeled after Ozanam Manor. Ozanam Manor, located on SVdP’s primary campus, currently offers accommodations for 60 unhoused individuals and has achieved remarkable success, with 98% of its former residents maintaining stable housing and not requiring further homelessness assistance within one year of departure.

The Bob and Marion Auray Companion Animal Clinic will be partnering with Midwestern University to provide services for pets of the homeless or those at-risk. 

The project is being sponsored by the State of Arizona, the City of Phoenix, Maricopa County, and private donations. Ryan Companies Inc., is the general contractor for the project. 

About St. Vincent de Paul

The Society of St. Vincent de Paul is a global nonprofit committed to assisting those in need and fostering community engagement. is the largest SVdP branch nationwide, established in 1946 to provide essential support to families across central and northern Arizona through food, clothing, shelter, and healthcare services. Their network includes over 80 local food pantries, five dining rooms, transitional shelters, a homeless resource center, bill assistance, homelessness prevention initiatives, and a charity clinic offering medical, dental, and wellness services to the uninsured.

Housing 2025

The new transitional housing structure is part of SVdP’s , which aims to permanently house 2,025 homeless individuals by 2025. Since launching this initiative in October 2022, the non-profit has successfully provided permanent housing for 1,771 individuals through its transitional housing initiatives.

“This is our moment to do our part to help some of our most vulnerable neighbors during a critical time by expanding on a model of transitional housing with proven success,” said Shannon Clancy, SVdP’s Rob & Melani Walton Endowed CEO. “Our unhoused seniors, veterans, and neighbors with disabilities deserve greater access to a housing program as dignified and loving as Ozanam Manor—a place to help them find a home, and a support system with wraparound care that ensures their long-term housing success.”

The post Saint Vincent de Paul cuts ribbon on new temporary housing facility appeared first on ���ϳԹ���.

The National Association of Manufacturers and several business groups are calling on Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-LA), Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and House Minority Leader Hakeen Jeffries (D-N.Y.) to consider the impact the new Environmental Protection Agency ruling on PM2.5 will have on businesses. 

PM2.5 refers to air particles that are less than 2.5 micrometers in diameter.

The EPA in March lowered the standard for PM2.5 in its National Ambient Air Quality Standards rule by 25%, down from 12 micrograms per cubic meter of air to nine. NAM has sued to block the new standard.

EPA calls for steeper cut with a faster timeline

NAM has that the EPA’s new ruling is far more restrictive than other countries, with the UK aiming to lower its standard to 10 micrograms by 2040. 

“The new standard will also put the United States at a disadvantage by hurting our ability to compete on the world stage. Our global competitors have adopted standards that are less stringent than the EPA rule and are phased in over a much longer time frame,” a letter led by NAM says. “Congress must act to stop this harmful rule before it takes effect.”

Arizona job creators and legislative leaders weigh in

Last November, the Arizona ���ϳԹ��� of Commerce & Industry and the Arizona Manufacturers Council were part of a NAM-led coalition that argued against the EPA’s proposed rulemaking. In a letter Danny Seiden, president & CEO of the Arizona ���ϳԹ���, remarked that wildfires a great deal of pollution to Arizona.

In a separate filing made in March, the Arizona ���ϳԹ���, state Senate President Warren Petersen, and House Speaker Ben Toma are contesting the EPA ruling. 

New standard will crimp growth

NAM insists the congressional leaders should consider the negative effects the ruling will have on businesses, arguing the more restrictive regulation will make it more challenging for states to issue permits for building new facilities or expanding existing factories.

NAM also argued that the ruling puts the U.S. at a competitive disadvantage globally since other nations are not lowering their standards at the same rate. The European Union is not lowering its standard to 10 micrograms until 2030, while China is retaining its 35 micrograms standard. 

“Americans deserve a strong economy and a healthy environment. We urge Congress to pass a resolution of disapproval addressing the EPA’s actions as quickly as possible,” the letter says.

The post Business groups continue to push back against EPA overreach on PM2.5   appeared first on ���ϳԹ���.

A new white from autonomous technology firm Aurora Innovation examines how the cutting edge innovation could reshape the trucking industry and positively affect energy efficiency. 

By using fuel sources more efficiently, autonomous technology could reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve air quality. The paper looks at the factors influencing energy usage and delves into the specific opportunities and obstacles for autonomous trucking, and it introduces an integrated model for estimating the potential energy savings of a standard over-the-road tractor-trailer in the United States.

The potential benefits

• Autonomous trucks, exempt from hours-of-service regulations, diminish the need to drive at high speeds for quicker arrivals. Consequently, driving at lower speeds reduces fuel consumption per mile. Adopting Aurora’s strategy of maintaining a speed of 65 mph rather than 70-75 mph could potentially decrease highway fuel usage by 9%-17%.

• Trucks frequently use fuel while idling during driver breaks for rest, meals, or downtime between hauls, accounting for 4%-9% of fuel consumption. Although autonomous trucks cannot eradicate idling entirely, they could optimize driving time more effectively.

• A large amount of energy is expended due to ineffective acceleration and braking. Autonomous trucks have the capacity for eco-driving, which involves strategically optimizing acceleration, braking, and coasting to enhance energy efficiency and lower fuel consumption. Referencing a study highlighted in the white paper, it was discovered that implementing more strategic coasting could result in fuel savings of up to 9.5%.

• Autonomous trucks have the capability to operate almost continuously throughout the day, allowing them to transition more freight transportation to off-peak hours. This shift not only lowers the fuel consumption of autonomous trucks by reducing time spent in traffic but also aids in alleviating congestion and decreasing fuel usage for other vehicles.

Furthermore, the white paper also suggests that the adoption of autonomous trucks could pave the way for accelerated adoption of next-generation powertrains. 

“As autonomous trucks make hauling freight safer, we have a responsibility to make logistics more sustainable as well. Self-driving technology can fight climate change by increasing energy efficiency and reducing emissions in the supply chain,” paper author Garrett Bray said.

The view from Arizona

Arizona has become a hub for the testing of autonomous passenger and heavy-duty vehicles, which the head of the Arizona Manufacturers Council said enhances the state’s competitive standing for advanced manufacturing.

“Arizona is a leader in the research, development, and manufacture of next generation automotives, whether they’re autonomous, electric, or alternative fuel,” AMC Executive Director Grace Appelbe said. “The innovations in the heavy-duty truck space are especially exciting because they not only attract new job-creating talent to Arizona, but they also are likely to have an immediate positive effect on our supply chain and logistics sector, which further enhances the state’s economic competitiveness.”

The post Autonomous trucking likely to be more energy efficient, new research says appeared first on ���ϳԹ���.

The Federal Trade Commission on Tuesday voted to ban noncompete agreements. The ban would prohibit new noncompete agreements for every employee and mandate that companies inform both current and former staff that they won’t be enforcing such agreements. Additionally, businesses will be obligated to revoke existing noncompete agreements for the majority of their employees. Senior level executives’ agreements, however, may remain intact. 

The FTC view

Commission members backing the ban argue that noncompete agreements are unfair for workers. 

“It is so profoundly unfree and unfair for people to be stuck in jobs they want to leave, not because they lacked better alternatives, but because noncompetes preclude another firm from fairly competing for their labor,” FTC Commissioner Rebecca Slaughter (D) said. 

The chairwoman of the FTC argued that the ban will foster new business formation.

“Noncompete clauses keep wages low, suppress new ideas, and rob the American economy of dynamism, including from the more than 8,500 new startups that would be created a year once noncompetes are banned,” said FTC Chair Lina M. Khan. “The FTC’s final rule to ban noncompetes will ensure Americans have the freedom to pursue a new job, start a new business, or bring a new idea to market.”

Businesses strongly disagree

Business groups blasted the rule, arguing that noncompetes are important to the protection of intellectual property and that the FTC lacks the authority even to issue such a ban. 

Bills have been introduced in Congress to reform noncompete agreements, but no authority has been explicitly granted to the FTC. 

Suzanne Clark, president and CEO of the U.S. ���ϳԹ��� of Commerce said that the ban is “a blatant power grab that will undermine American businesses’ ability to remain competitive.”

Melissa Holyoak and Andrew Ferguson, two of the agency’s Republican commissioners, echoed these sentiments. 

“We are not a legislature,” Ferguson . “I do not believe we have the power to nullify tens of millions of existing contracts.”

In a press release from the National Association of Manufacturers, the organization that the ban is “Unprecedented and threatens manufacturers’ ability to attract and retain talent. In addition, today’s action puts at risk the security of intellectual property and trade secrets — anathema to an industry that accounts for 53% of all private-sector R&D.” 

The Arizona ���ϳԹ��� of Commerce & Industry called it “federal overreach at its finest.”

Read more

Arizona ���ϳԹ��� President and CEO Danny Seiden in a column last year when the ban was originally floated by the FTC, said, “The proposed rule stretches the agency’s mission to the point of absurdity and seeks to unilaterally reinterpret the section of the Federal Trade Commission Act on ‘unfair methods of competition,’ never mind what the pesky legislative branch or the 50 states might have to say on the subject.”

The post Business groups blast FTC decision to ban noncompete agreements appeared first on ���ϳԹ���.

���ϳԹ��� sat down recently with Benji Backer, the founder of the American Conservation Coalition and the author of The Conservative Environmentalist: Common Sense Solutions for a Sustainable Future, which will be released Apr. 16.

Here’s part 1 of our conversation. Portions have been edited for clarity.

���ϳԹ���: What is the American Conservation Coalition?

Benji Backer: The American Conservation Coalition is an organization I started when I was at college at the University of Washington. The last 16 years I have been active in politics. My other passion is being in the outdoors, which led me to move to Arizona. I fell in love with the outdoors here. To me, when I’m in nature, the environment itself doesn’t seem political or partisan. and I became super frustrated that the narrative in environmental politics has been and was at the time basically like this Green New Deal alarmist, “the world’s gonna end”, or we need huge government action to overhaul the economy, or we should be doing nothing – that there’s no problem at all.

So, the American Conservation Coalition and this book aim to fill that gap by creating a grassroots community of young people like me – 40,000 of us now over 200 communities – in chapters that are pushing elected officials, business leaders, and decision makers to prioritize the environment in a way that is good for humanity, good for our economy, good for our individual lives, and allowing us to have individual liberty and prosperity at the same time. It’s basically creating an alternative environmental movement.

CBN: Do you anticipate the Coalition making its voice heard in the presidential election?

Backer: We feel like the presidential election this year and previous years has been an encapsulation of part of the problem, which is that the narrative is still kind of this doom and gloom. “We need drastic action,” versus “these issues don’t matter.” 

We feel like, regardless of who wins, we need to make progress, and we need to do it in a common sense, realistic way. So, we’re not going to be weighing in on endorsing a candidate in the 2024 election.

We will be endorsing some congressional candidates – ones that have prioritized the environment and prioritized this kind of common sense, pro-economy approach. But at the presidential level, we just feel like it’s another election where, unfortunately, even though most Americans don’t believe the denial versus alarmist narrative, that’s unfortunately the narrative that we’re kind of having to buy into by choosing a candidate. So we’re just setting our sights on what we can accomplish after the election at the state and federal levels.

Benji Backer, Founder and Executive Chairman, American Conservation Coalition

CBN: Why do you believe conservatism, properly understood, goes hand in hand with conservation?

Backer: The conservatives used to lead environmental progress. You look back at Teddy Roosevelt, to Richard Nixon, to Ronald Reagan, and George H.W. Bush, those four presidents, all Republicans, led the most historic environmental initiatives of all time. The Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, the Endangered Species Act, creation of the EPA, creation of the National Park system as we know it, the largest marine sanctuary and public lands protections of all time. Those are all under those presidents.

Conservatism used to have conservation as a core pillar of its value system. But most importantly, there’s a reason for that. And the reason is, conservatives who tend to  be freedom loving Americans who appreciate the beauty of our country, love to recreate in nature. They’re often the hunters and fishermen and women. They’re the ranchers and the farmers. They’re the hikers and skiers and people who just love spending time outdoors. Of course they want to protect [the environment]. And, you know, conservatives tend to be more often than not located in rural areas, which are nestled in nature itself.

When you think about Arizona, or you think about any of the states in the West, the most conservative parts are parts in nature, and they have a personal stake in protecting the environment. So, what my message is, is that this issue used to be one that conservatives led on and it can be again. It’s an authentically conservative position, but it’s authentically a nonpartisan position as well. To me nature is nonpartisan – to me the environment is something that we all share.

CBN: Can the views and agenda of the American Conservation Coalition and those expressed in your book still have a home in today’s version of conservatism, which tends to be defined by the views and attitudes of the former president and his supporters?

Backer: I think the conservative movement has absolutely lost its way on these issues. This is a new problem, and it’s one that is so avoidable and unnecessary. 

The reason why Trump supporters and conservatives are so skeptical of environmental action is because they perceive that the only solutions are ones that are going to hurt them and take control of their lives. And what I’m trying to tell conservative leaders and voters is that that’s not the case. Just because you don’t like the other side’s ideas doesn’t mean that you can’t propose good ideas of your own. You should be playing offense and proposing good ideas.

I don’t think that it’s too late to turn the tide by any means, but I do think that it’s harmful when the president talks about the environment as basically a consumer good, and that we can just kind of tap into it as much as we want and that there aren’t any repercussions. I think he’s very misguided in that, and I think if he wants to show young people that he actually cares about them and this country, he changes his tune. 

This issue is going to be important past the time that Trump is relevant. This is going to be something that we have to fight for for decades, and my generation’s right and left isn’t going to tolerate environmental inaction.

The post Author of new book The Conservative Environmentalist says conservation, love of environment is at heart of conservatism appeared first on ���ϳԹ���.

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration recently published a new that requires that both employer and employee representatives have the opportunity to accompany OSHA compliance officers during the physical inspection of a workplace. This has been referred to as the “walkaround rule.”

The original ruling was amended to include, “[t]he representative(s) authorized by employees may be an employee of the employer or a third party.”

According to many business groups, including the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) and the American Hotel and Lodging Association (AHLA), the new ruling OSHA’s authority.  

The AHLA joined the Coalition for Workspace Safety (CWS) in and a to the House Subcommittee on Workforce protections back in September. 

One worry is that the ruling will allow those engaged in actions against businesses — such as environmental activists and union organizers — to gather information to be used against the business and for the possible purpose of obtaining confidential information and targeting specific workers for a union organizing drive. 

“The final rule would fundamentally change the nature of the workplace safety inspections and put OSHA in the middle of organizing campaigns and/or labor negotiations between the employer and union,” AHLA said. “These individuals, who could be union organizers, environmental activists, or engaged in some other campaign against the employer, could use the inspection as an opportunity to collect information about the workplace, target workers for an organizing drive, or simply obtain proprietary information.”

Also, in another expansion of its authority, OSHA will be able to decide what third party qualifies as an “authorized representative.” This ability was previously reserved solely for the National Labor Relations Board. 

“This is another clear example of the federal regulatory onslaught – a proposal that upends settled precedent and ignores the reasoned decision-making required by the Administrative Procedure Act. For these reasons, the NAM will be considering legal action to reverse this incredibly destabilizing decision,” NAM said in a statement. 

The U.S. ���ϳԹ��� of Commerce said it would also consider legal action.

“We are disappointed OSHA has chosen to inject union organizing tactics into inspections that should be focused solely on workplace safety,” U.S. ���ϳԹ��� Vice President of Workplace Policy Marc Freedman said. “This regulation further demonstrates this Administration’s determination to aid unions whenever possible, even at the expense of an agency’s core mission. The ���ϳԹ��� is considering all options, including litigation, in response to this flawed rule.”

Also, the ruling could property rights of employers and rights guaranteed by the fourth amendment. By including a third party in inspections alongside compliance officers, OSHA runs the risk of conducting searches on employers that may be deemed unreasonable, with no recourse available. Employers are safeguarded by the Fourth Amendment’s exclusionary rule in cases where OSHA secures an improper warrant. 

The final ruling goes into effect on May 31.

The post Business groups blast new OSHA rule appeared first on ���ϳԹ���.

The House on January 31 passed the Tax Relief For American Families And Workers Act, 357-70.��Despite its broad, bipartisan support, the bill to extend and enhance several elements of the tax code, many of which are important to America’s businesses, is stalled in the Senate, prompting a call for action from national business groups like the National Association of Manufacturers.��

The NAM released a campaign last week urging the Senate to take action on the bill.

“Vital tax provisions are expiring, harming our ability to compete globally and invest in new factories and equipment,” the ad says. “The House has done its job and restored these provisions with overwhelming support. The Senate needs to act now.”

The U.S. ���ϳԹ��� of Commerce it would include the bill on the group’s congressional scorecard, which helps determine campaign endorsements. 

Tax reforms for families and business

• Modifies the calculation of the refundable portion of the child tax credit for 2023-2025.
• Increases the maximum refundable amount per child to $1,800 in 2023, $1,900 in 2024, and $2,000 in 2025.
• Allows taxpayers to elect to use prior year earned income for the earned income tax credit in 2024 and 2025.
• Allows taxpayers to delay deducting domestic research costs over a five-year period until 2026.
• Extends depreciation, amortization, or depletion allowances for determining the business interest deduction.
• Extends 100% bonus depreciation and increases limitations on expensing depreciable business assets.

Opposition from GOP

The enhanced child tax credit provisions have bogged down negotiations in the Senate, where Sen. Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, the ranking member on the Senate Finance Committee, says he wants significant amendments.

“While my concerns with the bill may be frustrating to some, they should not be surprising.��I remain concerned the CTC provisions undermine the work requirement and represent a significant shift – described by some Democrats as a down payment – to transform the CTC from primarily working family tax relief into a government subsidy,” Crapo .��

Only nine Republican votes would be necessary to prevent a filibuster and bring the bill to a vote, but so far most GOP senators are aligned with Crapo. Only Sen. Todd Young, R-Ind., has his colleagues to move the bill forward.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., has already passed a to get the ball rolling, however without assurances he can secure the 60-vote threshold to overcome a filibuster, he’s unlikely to put the bill on the floor.

Maybe next year?

Part of Crapo and Republicans’ calculus includes their expectation that they’ll control the Senate next year and will be able to extract a better deal than what passed the House.

The post Business groups urge Senate action on federal tax bill, but chances appear bleak appeared first on ���ϳԹ���.

The Arizona ���ϳԹ��� of Commerce & Industry joined state Senate President Warren Petersen and House Speaker Ben Toma in filing a petition Monday in the United States Court of Appeals to contest the Environmental Protection Agency’s recent regulation regarding fine particulate matter, or PM2.5. 

Their argument asserts that the regulation “exceeds the agency’s statutory authority and otherwise is arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, and not in accordance with law.”

In November of 2023, the ���ϳԹ��� and the Arizona Manufacturers Council and the National Association of Manufacturers challenged the EPA’s proposed rulemaking.

Earlier this month, the National Association of Manufacturer’s Legal Center sued to block the EPA’s rule that lowered the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for fine particulate matter (PM2.5) to 9 micrograms per cubic meter.

The NAM has advocated for retaining the current standards. Lowering the standard to 9 micrograms per cubic meter is far ahead of other countries, the European Union plans to reduce its standard to 10 by 2030, the United Kingdom plans to reduce its standard to 10 by 2040. 

The new, more aggressive U.S. standard will cause numerous issues for manufacturers, crippling production. 

According to the , the regulation is projected to endanger activity valued between $162.4 billion and $197.4 billion, potentially putting at risk 852,100 to 973,900 existing jobs.

 “Arizona’s businesses understand the importance of environmental stewardship, but the EPA’s new standard on fine particulate matter disregards the collaborative spirit of environmental regulation,” ���ϳԹ��� President and CEO Danny Seiden said. “By imposing unrealistic mandates, the federal government is hindering our ability to address local challenges effectively.

“Arizona needs solutions that consider our unique circumstances and promote sustainable economic growth without unnecessary regulatory burdens. The EPA’s one-size-fits-all approach will have real consequences for industries across our state and will jeopardize future job creation. But aside from the economic implications, EPA’s action exceeds its statutory authority and threatens the balance of cooperative federalism essential for effective environmental governance.

“We are grateful to President Petersen and Speaker Toma for standing with the ���ϳԹ��� and with Arizona job creators, and we encourage the Court to overturn this harmful and unlawful rule.”

The post Business community and legislative leaders file legal challenge to new EPA rule appeared first on ���ϳԹ���.

It’s an election year, with the Presidential Preference Primary this week, the party primaries in July, and the general election in November.

But less discussed are the SRP Association and District elections.

Here’s a brief explainer of how the elections work.

When’s the election?

The officials of each organization are elected on the first Tuesday in April of even-numbered years, which this year is April 2.

Who can vote?

To vote you must own eligible property within certain zones. You must also be at least 18 years old. Here is a of the zoning. 

What is the Association? What is the District?

The SRP is made up of two organizations — the Salt River Valley Water Users’ Association and the Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement and Power District. 

This Association is a private company formed in 1903. The District is a political subdivision of the state of Arizona. It is focused on agricultural improvement and was created in 1937. 

The Association supplies almost 1 million acre-feet of water to a service area spanning 240,000 acres in metropolitan Phoenix. A vast water delivery network, consisting of 1,265 miles of canals, laterals, and smaller channels, is fed by the reservoir system. This network facilitates the distribution of water to urban and agricultural users, encompassing cities, towns, and urban irrigators.

Being a political subdivision of the state, the District has the authority to issue tax-exempt municipal bonds. This action effectively lowers interest expenses, resulting in substantial savings for SRP electric and water consumers, amounting to millions of dollars.

How do you cast a ballot?

By mail or by casting a ballot at an SRP Voting Center.

To request a ballot, call (602) 236-3048. Requests for early ballots will be taken until March 22. Mailed ballots must be returned by Apr. 2. 

The Voting Center at 1500 N. Mill Avenue in Tempe, Arizona, 85288, will operate from 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. on Election Day. 

Additionally, individuals who have not returned their early mail ballots earlier can deliver them to the SRP Voting Center or either of the two off-site ballot drop-off locations. These drop-off locations will be open exclusively on Election Day from 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. 

The two off-site drop-off sites are 

• SRP West Valley Service Center, located at 221 N. 79th Avenue, Tolleson, Arizona, 85353 
• SRP Southside Water Service Center at 3160 S. Alma School Road, Mesa, Arizona, 85210

How long does a term last?

The terms last four years for all positions. However, voting is staggered, with only half of the offices being available each voting cycle. 

Once elected, what are members’ responsibilities?

President and Vice President 

The president of each organization holds the highest position and oversees all other officers in carrying out their responsibilities, as well as managing the affairs of the organization. Additionally, the president chairs all meetings of the respective board and serves as an ex officio member of that board. In the absence of the president, the vice president assumes their duties and responsibilities. Together, they act as the daily representatives of the boards in managing SRP.

Board 

The boards set forth distinct policies and oversee the operations of their respective organizations. The Association adheres to its Articles of Incorporation and By-laws, while the District operates in compliance with Arizona statutes and its own By-Laws. 

Both organizations also abide by Federal Reclamation Law and relevant legislation. For instance, the District board establishes power prices, approves fuel contracts, and authorizes significant equipment purchases. Additionally, both boards have the authority to approve water rates.

Council 

While the boards establish particular policies governing SRP’s management, the councils enact and adopt by-laws, ensuring their enforcement for the governance, business management, and conduct of affairs within each organization. They also address vacancies occurring within the boards and councils, and determine compensation for board and council members. Furthermore, the District Council has the authority to approve revenue bonds issued by the District.

Who’s running?

There are many candidates running for both the District and the Association. 

Those running for the Association’s board are Larry Rovey, Mario Herrera, Andrea Moreno, Lauren Kuby, Stephen Williams, Nick Brown, Keith Woods, Robert Arnett, and Anna Morr-Almeida. 

Candidates running for the Association’s council are Tyler Francis, Ron Kolb, Clifford Leatherwood, Aaron Herrera, Richard Swier, Paul Van Hofwegen, John Augustine, Ashley Hodge, John Lines, Roberta Miller, John Penry, John Shelton, Eric Gorsegner, Mark Lewis, Barry Paceley, Colleen Resch-Geretti, Harmen Tjaarda Jr., Allen Freeman, Mark Freeman, Shelly Gordon, Adam Hatley, Ericka Varela, and Ryan Winkle.

Those running for the District’s board are Kevin Johnson, Mario Herrera, Andrea Moreno, Lauren Kuby, Stephen Williams, Nick Brown, Keith Woods, Robert Arnett, Anna Mohr-Almeida, Lisa Atkins, Casey Clowes, Anda McAfee, Victor Flores, and Sandra Kennedy.

Candidates running for the District’s council are the same as those running for the Association’s council.

Do you have to register with the SRP to vote in the elections? 

No, the SRP Corporate Secretary keeps track of real property ownership within the District and Association boundaries, as recorded by the Maricopa County Recorder. This includes the allocation of votes or fractional votes to each owner. However, it’s important to note that District voters must be registered within the State of Arizona to participate in voting.

The post What to know about upcoming SRP elections appeared first on ���ϳԹ���.

Two years after proposing an expansive and expensive climate disclosure regulation for public corporations, the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 6 adopted more narrow requirements amid concerns over potential legal disputes and recent court rulings, including one from the Supreme Court, that raised questions about the extent of the regulatory body’s jurisdiction. 

National Association of Manufacturers 

“The NAM demonstrated for the SEC the practical realities of such a sweeping proposed rule, encouraging the SEC to make significant changes to remove inflexible and infeasible mandates, require disclosure only of material information and protect small manufacturers from the impact of these requirements. Among other critical issues, the NAM called on the SEC to remove the rule’s onerous and unworkable Scope 3 supply chain emissions reporting mandate—which the SEC has now done,” NAM President and CEO Jay Timmons said.  

U.S. ���ϳԹ��� of Commerce 

“For two years now, the U.S. ���ϳԹ��� of Commerce has raised significant concerns about the scope, breadth, and legality of the SEC’s climate disclosure efforts. We are carefully reviewing the details of the rule and its legal underpinnings to understand its full impact. While it appears that some of the most onerous provisions of the initial proposed rule have been removed, this remains a novel and complicated rule that will likely have significant impact on businesses and their investors. The ���ϳԹ��� will continue to use all the tools at our disposal, including litigation if necessary, to prevent government overreach and preserve a competitive capital market system,” U.S. ���ϳԹ��� of Commerce Center for Capital Markets Competitiveness Executive Vice President Tom Quaadman. 

The SEC also modified the initially suggested Scope 1 and Scope 2 disclosures, now mandating that only larger companies furnish emissions data if it’s deemed material. Scope 1 pertains to direct emissions, while Scope 2 refers to indirect emissions from purchased energy. The SEC dropped Scope 3 entirely, which would have required reporting across customers and supply chains and would be difficult for companies to calculate.  

The regulation mandates that companies must divulge the capitalized costs, expenditures, and losses associated with carbon offsets and renewable energy credits or certificates if they utilize them as significant elements in attaining their climate objectives or targets. 

Despite its narrower scope than originally proposed, the rule could still face a legal challenge from industry that it violates the “major questions” doctrine, which the Supreme Court cited in West Virginia v. EPA, a 2022 ruling that curbed EPA’s ability to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from coal-fired power plants and that requires Congress to give agencies permission to adopt policies of significant political or economic consequence.  

“The NAM remains committed to ensuring the SEC acts within its statutory authority, prioritizes flexibility and provides much-needed guidance—just as we are committed to providing leadership in addressing environmental challenges,” said Timmons, “This is why the NAM is keeping all options on the table as we evaluate the rule’s potential impacts on the manufacturing sector.”

The post SEC scales back climate rule in response to concerns from industry appeared first on ���ϳԹ���.