Now that L.A. is officially boycotting Arizona..

.. does that include the electric bill?

By a 3-2 vote the board moves to suspend county-funded travel to the state, possibly terminate contracts with Arizona-based companies, and divest the county pension fund of Arizona state and municipal bonds. Residents attending the meeting spoke out on both sides of the issue.

 So I'm wondering will LA be steadfast in their boycott, or will it be a "selective" boycott?

The reason I ask is that according to Wonkette, LA Water and power dept claims that they "own" Arizona power plants.   So if this is true, shouldn't they be required, by the boycott of the LA county to divest themselves of the power plants?

We are part owner of both power plants, which are generating assets of the Department. As such, nothing in the City’s resolution is inconsistent with our continuing to receive power from those LADWP-owned assets.

Hell, i don't think Arizona could legally cut off the power regardless (at least by the interstate commerce rules?), but by admission of part ownership (Majority?  Minority?  Teeny-tiney ownership?) the LADWP just pretty much admitted, we're only going to boycott you in words only.

But I just found the numbers:  LA owns 21% of one station and 5% of another...

Los Angeles owns 21 percent of the 2,250 MW coal-fired Navajo Generating Station in Arizona, which powers the Los Angeles area, as well as areas of Nevada and Arizona.

The 3,740 MW Palo Verde nuclear generating station, located 45 miles west of Phoenix, powers Los Angeles as well as other major cities in the area. Arizona Public Service owns about 30 percent of the power plant, and serves as its operator. The Los Angeles Department of Power and Water also owns more than 5 percent of the generation asset.

It will be interesting to see what happens if LA refuses to pay for their electric bills.... cause then they're not paying their own govt?     I mean they could just try to be like New York I guess... I mean they already say the state is going broke.