ARIZONA CENTER FOR LAW IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST

As filed

Subsection

03

NTEE code

R600

Classification

1000

Street

352 E CAMELBACK RD STE 200

These codes are the IRS's own and are shown exactly as filed. What each one means is in the Business Master File documentation (opens in a new tab).

Mission and programs · 2024

• THE ARIZONA CENTER FOR LAW IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST ("ACLPI- OR "THE CENTER") ONLY LITIGATES CASES THAT SERVE THE PUBLIC INTEREST. IN 2024, OUR CASES ALL SERVED THE BROAD PUBLIC INTEREST. IN ALL OF THE CENTER'S CASES, WE DO NOT CHARGE OUR CLIENTS ATTORNEYS' FEES. ARIZONA RECOGNIZES THE PRIVATE ATTORNEY GENERAL DOCTRINE AND HAS SPECIFIC STATUTES THAT PROVIDE FOR AN AWARD OF FEES FOR THE SUCCESSFUL PARTY. UNDER THIS DOCTRINE, THE CENTER WILL SEEK ATTORNEYS' FEES FROM THE ADVERSE PARTY (THE STATE OF ARIZONA). 1. THE CENTER IS LITIGATING A CASE AGAINST THE STATE OF ARIZONA FOR ITS FAILURE TO ADEQUATELY FUND THE CAPITAL NEEDS OF ARIZONAS PUBLIC SCHOOLS. THIS CASE IS ACTUALLY A FOLLOW UP CASE TO ONE THAT THE CENTER SUCCESSFULLY LITIGATED 30 YEARS AGO. AS A RESULT OF THAT CASE, FUNDS WERE PROVIDED TO BRING ALL DILAPIDATED SCHOOLS UP TO STANDARD, AND MONEY WAS TO BE PROVIDED TO KEEP ALL SCHOOLS IN GOOD SHAPE. THE LEGISLATURE SUBSEQUENTLY DE-FUNDED MOST OF THE PROGRAMS THAT WERE ESTABLISHED AS PART OF THE RESOLUTION OF THE OLD CASE, AND ARIZONA IS ONCE AGAIN IN A SYSTEM UNDER WHICH A SCHOOL DISTRICTS ABILITY TO MEET ITS CAPITAL NEEDS DEPENDS TO A VERY LARGE EXTENT ON THE AMOUNT OF PROPERTY WEALTH IN THE DISTRICT. IN 2024 THE CASE FINALLY WENT TO TRIAL. THE CENTER THEN PARTICIPATED IN POST- TRIAL BRIEFING THROUGH THE END OF 2024. (IN 2025 WE RECEIVED A RULING AND WE PREVAILED, THOUGH LEGISLATORS HAVE STATED PUBLICLY THAT THEY WILL APPEAL.) IF THE CENTER IS ULTIMATELY SUCCESSFUL, THEN THE STATE WILL BE FORCED TO IMPLEMENT A SYSTEM THAT COMPLIES WITH THE GENERAL AND UNIFORM CLAUSE IN THE ARIZONA CONSTITUTION. THIS CASE WILL HELP THE APPROXIMATELY 900,000 TO 1,000,000 CHILDREN IN ARIZONAS PUBLIC SCHOOLS. THE CASE IS CAPTIONED, GLENDALE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT V. STATE OF ARIZONA. THE NAMED PLAINTIFFS ARE FOUR ARIZONA SCHOOL DISTRICTS AS WELL AS THE ARIZONA SCHOOL BOARDS ASSOCIATION, THE ARIZONA SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS ASSOCIATION, THE ARIZONA EDUCATION ASSOCIATION, AND AN INDIVIDUAL TAXPAYER. THE CENTER HAS SUBMITTED A FEE APPLICATION ON SEPTEMBER 12, 2025 AND IS AWAITING A RULING FROM THE COURT. 2. THE CENTER SUCCESSFULLY LITIGATED A CASE AGAINST THE STATE OF ARIZONA ON BEHALF OF ALL OF ARIZONAS FOSTER CHILDREN. THIS CASE IS A CLASS ACTION, WHERE IN ADDITION TO THE GENERAL CLASS OF ALL FOSTER CHILDREN THERE ARE SUBCLASSES THAT PERTAIN TO SUBSETS OF CHILDREN (E.G., THOSE WHO RECEIVE MEDICAID SERVICES, AND THOSE WHO ARE PLACED IN NON-KINSHIP SETTINGS). THE CASE WAS BROUGHT BECAUSE THE STATE (1) FAILS TO PROVIDE REASONABLE AND APPROPRIATE SERVICES TO ARIZONA'S FOSTER CHILDREN; (2) FAILS TO ASSURE THAT FOSTER CHILDREN RECEIVE APPROPRIATE MEDICAL, DENTAL, AND BEHAVIORAL HEALTH CARE; (3) UNREASONABLY PLACES CHILDREN IN CONGREGATE CARE SETTINGS (WHICH NEGATIVELY IMPACT CHILDREN); (4) UNREASONABLY SEPARATES SIBLINGS; AND (5) FAILS TO TIMELY AND ADEQUATELY INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF ABUSE OF CHILDREN WHILE IN CARE; AND MANY OTHER DEFICIENT PRACTICES. THE STATE VIGOROUSLY CONTESTED WHETHER THIS CASE MAY PROCEED AS A CLASS ACTION. THE CENTER (AND CO-COUNSEL) HAVE ACHIEVED VICTORIES ON THIS QUESTION IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA, AND THAT RULING WAS LARGELY AFFIRMED ON APPEAL IN THE 9TH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS. THE CASE IS KNOWN AS B.K. V. MCKAY AND THE STATE OF ARIZONA. THE CASE SOUGHT BROAD RELIEF ON BEHALF OF ALL CURRENT AND FUTURE FOSTER CHILDREN, AND OBVIOUSLY SERVES A BROAD PUBLIC INTEREST. THE PARTIES ENTERED INTO A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT THAT WAS APPROVED BY THE DISTRICT COURT IN EARLY 2021. THE CENTER WILL CONTINUE TO BE INVOLVED IN MONITORING COMPLIANCE WITH THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. IN 2024, WE INITIATED A MEDIATION/DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCESS DUE TO THE STATE'S FAILURE TO IMPLEMENT SOLUTIONS TO PROBLEMS AS REQUIRED BY THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. MONITORING IS ONGOING. PURSUANT TO THE COURT-ORDERED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT, ATTORNEY FEES FOR MONITORING RECEIVED DURING 2024 WERE 75,000. IN AUGUST 2024, THREE YEARS INTO THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT, THE PLAINTIFFS INVOKED THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROVISIONS OF THE AGREEMENT ALLEGING THAT THE STATE HAD NOT REDUCED PLACEMENT OF CHILDREN IN CONGREGATE CARE, NOR INCREASED FAMILY FOSTER HOME OPTIONS, NOR INCREASED TREATMENT FOSTER HOMES CAPACITY, NOR ENSURED CHILDREN RECEIVED THE BEHAVIORAL HEALTH SERVICES THEY NEED. JUDGE KEN FIELDS IS THE MEDIATOR APPOINTED BY THE COURT. HE ATTEMPTED THROUGH MEDIATION TO REMEDY THE DISPUTE. ULTIMATELY, MEDIATION WAS NOT SUCCESSFUL AND THE ISSUE OF THE STATE'S COMPLIANCE WITH THE AGREEMENT IS BEFORE JUDGE FIELDS. WE EXPECT A RULING BY DECEMBER 31, 2025. 3. THROUGHOUT 2024, THE CENTER CHALLENGED AN ILLEGALLY DISCRIMINATORY "GRID ACCESS CHARGE" CREATED IN THE LAST ARIZONA PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY ("APS") RATE CASE. IN 2022, APS FILED AN APPLICATION SEEKING AN INCREASE IN CONSUMER ELECTRIC RATES BEFORE THE ARIZONA CORPORATION COMMISSION ("ACC"). THE CENTER INTERVENED ON BEHALF OF MULTIPLE NON-PROFITS. AT THE END OF A SIX-WEEK HEARING, THE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE ISSUED A REOMMENDED OPINION AND ORDER THAT CONTAINED, FOR THE FIRST TIME, A "GRID ACCESS CHARGE" THAT WAS SPECIFIC ONLY TO ROOFTOP SOLAR CUSTOMERS (AND THUS ILLEGALLY DISCRIMINATORY UNDER FEDERAL AND STATE LAWS). OVER OBJECTIONS BY NUMEROUS PARTIES (INCLUDING THE CENTER'S CLIENT VOTE SOLAR), THE ACC APPROVED THE GRID ACCESS CHARGE IN DECEMBER 2023. VOTE SOLAR, ALONG WITH THE STATE OF ARIZONA AND ANOTHER INTERVENOR, FILED APPLICATIONS FOR REHEARING, CITING THE ILLEGALITY OF THE DISCRIMINATORY CHARGE UNDER FEDERAL AND STATE LAW, AS WELL AS THE VIOLATION OF DUE PROCESS RIGHTS BECAUSE THE GRID ACCESS CHARGE WAS NEVER LITIGATED IN THE HEARING. IN APRIL 2024, THE ACC GRANTED A LIMITED REHEARING ON THE LEGALITY OF THE GRID ACCESS CHARGE, AND 10 DAYS OF REHEARING WERE HELD IN OCTOBER-NOVEMBER 2024. THE ACC AGAIN APPROVED THE GRID ACCESS CHARGE IN DECEMBER 2024, AND THE PARTIES APPEALED IN JANUARY 2025. THE CENTER WAS ASSISTED IN THE REHEARING AND THE SUBSEQUENT APPEAL BY EARTHJUSTICE. THE APPEAL IS ONGOING, AND WE DO NOT HAVE AN ESTIMATE ON WHEN A RULING FROM THE COURT OF APPEALS WILL BE DELIVERED. THIS CASE REPRESENTS THE FIRST MAJOR LEGAL CHALLENGE AGAINST THE ACC IN A SERIES OF DECISIONS THAT ASSERT THE ACC IS FAILING IN ITS CONSTITUTIONAL DUTIES TO SET JUST AND REASONABLE AND NON-DISCRIMINATORY RATES IN ARIZONA AND THAT THE ACC IS UNFAIRLY BEHOLDEN TO CORPORATE INTERESTS OF THE UTILITIES. 4. IN APRIL 2024, THE CENTER REPRESENTED SWEEP ALONGSIDE MULTIPLE OTHER ALLIED PARTIES IN AN EVIDENTIARY HEARING BEFORE THE ARIZONA POWER PLANT AND LINE SITING COMMITTEE RELATED TO THE PROPOSED EXPANSION BY UNISOURCE ELECTRIC ("UNSE") OF THE BLACK MOUNTAIN GENERATING STATION, A GAS-FIRED POWER STATION IN MOHAVE COUNTY, ARIZONA. USING A NOVEL INTERPRETATION OF ARIZONA LAW, UNSE ARGUED THAT EACH INDIVIDUAL POWER GENERATOR WOULD BE UNDER THE 100 MW THRESHOLD REQUIRED TO OBTAIN A CERTIFICATE OF ENVIRONMENTAL COMPATIBILITY ("CEC"), AND EVEN THOUGH THE NET INCREASE ACROSS MULTIPLE PROPOSED GENERATORS WOULD BE OVER 100 MW, THE LINE SITING COMMITTEE (AND THE ARIZONA CORPORATION COMMISSION) DID NOT HAVE JURISDICTION. THE LINE SITING COMMITTEE VOTED 10-2 AGAINST UNSE AND FOUND THAT IT DID HAVE JURISDICTION AND THAT A CEC WAS NECESSARY. UNSE APPEALED THE DECISION TO THE ARIZONA CORPORATION COMMISSION ("ACC"), WHICH OVERTURNED THE LINE SITING COMMITTEE 4-1 IN JUNE 2024. SWEEP DID NOT APPEAL, BUT THE CENTER ASSISTED IN THE REPRESENTATION OF SIERRA CLUB IN THE SUBSEQUENT APPEAL TO MARICOPA SUPERIOR COURT, ALONGSIDE WESTERN RESOURCE ADVOCATES AND THE STATE OF ARIZONA. APPEALS IN THIS MATTER CONTINUE ONGOING IN 2025, AS DESPITE A POSITIVE RULING FROM THE SUPERIOR COURT IN OCTOBER 2025, THE ACC HAS FILED A NOTICE OF APPEAL TO THE ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS. THIS CASE REPRESENTS A SIGNIFICANT ISSUE REGARDING GOVERNMENTAL OVERSIGHT OF UTILITIES IN THE STATE WITH RELATION TO THERMAL ENERGY GENERATION (INCLUDING GAS AND NUCLEAR) AND COULD RESULT IN DANGEROUS PRECEDENT, SO IT IS EXPECTED TO BE APPEALED AS FAR AS THE COURTS WILL ALLOW IT. 5. THE CENTER REPRESENTED TWO NON-PROFITS, SWEEP AND WILDFIRE, IN THE MOST RECENT SOUTHWEST GAS RATE CASE. SOUTHWEST GAS SOUGHT AN INCREASE IN CONSUMER GAS RATES, AND A TWO-WEEK HEARING WAS HELD BEFORE AN ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE WITH THE ACC IN NOVEMBER 2024. THIS WAS PROCEEDED BY MULTIPLE ROUNDS OF WRITTEN EXPERT TESTIMONY AND AT LEAST ONE ATTEMPT AT SETTLEMENT. SWEEP ADVOCATED PRIMARILY AGAINST AN ADJUSTMENT MECHANISM KNOWN AS THE SYSTEM INTEGRITY MECHANISM ("SIM"), WHICH WOULD ALLOW SOUTHWEST GAS TO INCREASE RATES WITHOUT HEARING TO RECOVER SPECIFIC COSTS RELATED TO CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT. WILDFIRE PRIMARILY ADVOCATED FOR PROTECTIONS AND ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS FOR LOW-INCOME CONSUMERS, BUT IT ALSO OPPOSED THE SIM. THE SIM ISSUE WAS BIFURCATED FOLLOWING NEGOTIATIONS BETWEEN SOUTHWEST GAS AND THE MULTIPLE INTERVENORS, AND THE MAJORITY OF THE CASE WAS ADJUDICATED FOLLOWING THE NOVEMBER HEARING. THE ISSUE O

  Expenses $828,040 · Revenue $75,000

As filed on the 2024 return. The filer continues this part on Schedule O, which is not shown here.

Officers and directors · 2024

As listed in Part VII of the 2024 return, in the order the filer printed them. Each return names its own; this is not a roster the organization keeps with us.

• DANIEL J ADELMAN

  EXECUTIVE DI

  Total calculated

  $168,465

  From this org

  $168,465

  From related orgs

  $0

  Other

  $0

  Hours/week

  40

  Schedule J breakdown matched by us

  Base

  $168,465

  Bonus

  —not reported

  Other

  —not reported

  Deferred

  —not reported

  Nontaxable benefits

  —not reported

  Filer's total

  $168,465

• ANNE C RONAN

  ATTORNEY

  Total calculated

  $140,209

  From this org

  $140,209

  From related orgs

  $0

  Other

  $0

  Hours/week

  40

• CHANELE N REYES

  ATTORNEY

  Total calculated

  $133,962

  From this org

  $133,962

  From related orgs

  $0

  Other

  $0

  Hours/week

  40

• MICHAEL AGUIRRE

  MEMBER

  Total calculated

  $0

  Hours/week

  0.5

• JENNIFER B ANDERSON

  PRESIDENT-EL

  Total calculated

  $0

  Hours/week

  0.5

• ROBERT BARTELS

  MEMBER

  Total calculated

  $0

  Hours/week

  0.5

• DR IRENE MARQUEZ BIGGS

  MEMBER

  Total calculated

  $0

  Hours/week

  0.5

• JASON BLISS

  MEMBER

  Total calculated

  $0

  Hours/week

  0.5

• JENNA LAPRADE BOUCHARD

  SECRETARY

  Total calculated

  $0

  Hours/week

  0.5

• REBECCA CAIN

  MEMBER

  Total calculated

  $0

  Hours/week

  0.5

• PETER S DAVIS

  MEMBER

  Total calculated

  $0

  Hours/week

  0.5

• BRYN K DEFUSCO

  MEMBER

  Total calculated

  $0

  Hours/week

  0.5

• JAMES DUFRESNE

  MEMBER

  Total calculated

  $0

  Hours/week

  0.5

• PAULA DURHAM

  MEMBER

  Total calculated

  $0

  Hours/week

  0.5

• STANLEY G FELDMAN

  MEMBER

  Total calculated

  $0

  Hours/week

  0.5

• LINDSAY FIORE

  PRESIDENT

  Total calculated

  $0

  Hours/week

  0.5

• STACY GABRIEL

  MEMBER

  Total calculated

  $0

  Hours/week

  0.5

• ANDY GAONA

  MEMBER

  Total calculated

  $0

  Hours/week

  0.5

• JOY HERR-CARDILLO

  MEMBER

  Total calculated

  $0

  Hours/week

  0.5

• ADRIANE J HOFMEYER

  MEMBER

  Total calculated

  $0

  Hours/week

  0.5

• PATRICK W MAUSE

  TREASURER

  Total calculated

  $0

  Hours/week

  0.5

• BRUCE MEYERSON

  MEMBER

  Total calculated

  $0

  Hours/week

  0.5

• JOEL NOMKIN

  MEMBER

  Total calculated

  $0

  Hours/week

  0.5

• TIFFANI LUCERO PASTOR

  MEMBER

  Total calculated

  $0

  Hours/week

  0.5

• SUSAN M ROTKIS

  MEMBER

  Total calculated

  $0

  Hours/week

  0.5

The first 25 listed. Compensation is as filed in Part VII: reportable pay from this organization and from related organizations, other compensation, and hours per week. The total, marked calculated, is our sum of the three dollar columns, with a blank column counted as $0; the form itself has no total. On a Form 990-EZ the columns are Part IV's instead, and on a Form 990-PF Part VIII's — compensation, contributions to benefit plans, and expense account — and the total sums those. A Schedule J breakdown is as filed: base pay, bonus, other, deferred compensation and nontaxable benefits from this organization, with any from related organizations beside each, and the filer's own total. It is shown with the Part VII listing of the same name on the same return. The form gives no key between the two, so that pairing is ours, and is marked matched by us. Earlier years are each on their own filing page.

Filings

• 2024

  Revenue

  $800,566

  Expenses

  $939,744

  Contributions

  $622,760

  Grants paid

  $0

• 2023

  Revenue

  $624,920

  Expenses

  $894,409

  Contributions

  $503,548

  Grants paid

  $0

• 2022

  Revenue

  $1,091,335

  Expenses

  $751,232

  Contributions

  $888,051

  Grants paid

  $0

The four totals the IRS asks for on Part I of the Form 990, as filed. A dash means the figure was not present on the return — not that it was zero.

Other returns filed

• 2021 · 990

  Revenue

  $1,038,507

  Expenses

  $764,461

  Assets (EOY)

  $1,727,854

• 2020 · 990

  Revenue

  $790,465

  Expenses

  $671,001

  Assets (EOY)

  $469,165

Nonprofiteer parses Forms 990, 990-EZ and 990-PF, in a window of recent tax years. These returns are recorded from the IRS e-file index, so their figures were extracted by that index rather than read from the return here — treat them as a different source from the filings above, not as more of the same record. A dash means the index carries no figure; Form 990-T listings carry none at all.

Grants made

No itemized grants to organizations. Schedule I is filed only by organizations that granted more than $5,000 to a recipient, so most filers have none.

Grants received

• ARIZONA ADVOCACY FOUNDATION

  $435,879

  2022 · GRANT TO SUPPORT LITIGATION AND OTHER WORK THAT PROMOTES DEMOCRACY

• UNITED STATES ENERGY FOUNDATION

  $70,000

  2023 · TO SUPPORT EDUCATION AND OUTREACH TO BUILD A CLEAN ENERGY FUTURE.

• UNITED STATES ENERGY FOUNDATION

  $60,000

  2022 · TO SUPPORT EDUCATION AND OUTREACH TO BUILD A CLEAN ENERGY FUTURE.

• UNITED STATES ENERGY FOUNDATION

  $50,000

  2024 · TO SUPPORT EDUCATION AND OUTREACH TO BUILD A CLEAN ENERGY FUTURE.

• FIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND

  $29,400

  2024 · For grant recipient's exempt purposes

• DONOR ADVISED CHARITABLE GIVING

  $25,300

  2024 · PUBLIC, SOCIETAL BENEFIT

• IMPACT FUND

  $22,500

  2023 · litigation costs

• DONOR ADVISED CHARITABLE GIVING

  $17,125

  2022 · PUBLIC, SOCIETAL BENEFIT

• FIDELITY INVESTMENTS CHARITABLE GIFT FUND

  $16,100

  2023 · For grant recipient's exempt purposes

• DONOR ADVISED CHARITABLE GIVING

  $13,200

  2023 · PUBLIC, SOCIETAL BENEFIT

The 10 largest by cash amount. The API serves every itemized grant.

Other IRS files