The Phoenix law firm of Timothy La Sota issued a complaint to Maricopa County Attorney Rachel Mitchell on Wednesday requesting that her office launch an investigation into Attorney General Kris Mayes for allegations of illegal use of public funds on campaign activities.
In the complaint, La Sota cites A.R.S. § 16-192(A) which states that a state official “shall not spend or use public resources to influence an election, including the use or expenditure of monies, accounts, credit, materials, equipment, buildings, facilities, vehicles, postage, telecommunications, computer hardware and software, web pages and personnel and any other thing of value of the public entity.”
Reflecting on the powerful stories shared at last night’s Community Impact Hearing on federal firings and DOGE funding freezes. I won’t stand by while billionaires in D.C. cut jobs and services—I'll keep fighting for the funding Arizonans deserve. pic.twitter.com/VKjTp10K0F
— AZ Attorney General Kris Mayes (@AZAGMayes) March 6, 2025
La Sota describes two specific incidents in which he alleges Mayes violated the law, drawing from posts by Mayes to social media and reporting from The Arizona Republic.
He wrote, “We have more facts about the one in Phoenix at Central High School last month…This event was nothing more than a thinly veiled political rally hosted by people who hate Donald Trump, and organized by Kris Mayes. The event featured three other far left Democratic Attorneys General, including Keith Ellison of Minnesota, Raul Torrez of New Mexico, and Dan Rayfield of Oregon. Mayes used it as an opportunity to boost the electoral chances of Congressman David Schweikert and Juan Ciscomani’s opponents, according to The Arizona Republic: ‘Where is (Rep.) David Schweikert? Where is (Rep.) Juan Ciscomani? If I have to, I’ll go hold the town hall in David Schweikert’s district, or Juan Ciscomani’s district, if that’s what it takes to give his constituents the right to speak out about this,’ Mayes said, taking aim at Arizona’s most vulnerable GOP House lawmakers.”
I will keep fighting to hold the Trump administration accountable and ensure they follow the law.
— AZ Attorney General Kris Mayes (@AZAGMayes) March 7, 2025
La Sota alleged that Mayes’ staff “clearly helped put this event together.” Further the complaint states that, though he wasn’t listed on the invitation, Ellison attended the March 5th event as shown in a Democratic Attorneys General Association livestream.
WATCH:
The attorney then contends that Mayes “returned the favor by flying to Minnesota, with taxpayer money, and participating in another political rally hosted by Ellison, this one also featuring scary, radical left-winger New York Attorney General Letitia James.”
La Sota concludes, “We support Ms. Mayes’ right to associate with whoever she wants to, no matter how extreme their political views are. Likewise, she has the right to say what she wants, no matter how far out of the Arizona mainstream she is. But she may not use taxpayer resources to amplify this message. And the law reflects the principle that public schools are not to be used for politicians to host political rallies. We ask that you investigate this and ensure that Mayes is held accountable.”
Maricopa County leaders are considering a $400,000 consulting contract to review and advise on elections.
The county is looking to contract with the accounting and consulting firm BerryDunn. The proposed contract would last for one year, with options to renew for up to four additional years. The contract also allows for the county to extend the contract on a monthly basis for up to six months after May 2026.
The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors was scheduled to decide on this contract during Wednesday’s meeting. They opted to delay a decision on the contract until their June 25 meeting.
BerryDunn has previously engaged in elections-related projects for the county. The firm conducted a procurement audit for the county’s voting system and related equipment in 2021, and an assessment of the county recorder’s election planning and Election Day activities following the 2018 primary and general elections.
Talks to secure a consulting firm for another audit of the county’s elections system emerged at the start of this year immediately after a slate of fresh faces took over the board of supervisors.
If approved, BerryDunn would review six areas of the county’s elections system with the goal of improving its efficiency: chain of custody, physical security, candidate filing compliance, temporary worker hiring and training, ballot drop boxes, and vote center selection and setup. In terms of efficiency, BerryDunn promised competency in assessing risk and analyzing trends while maintaining compliance with state and federal regulations.
The proposed timeline spans three phases promising 12 deliverables: planning and oversight for the first four weeks, discovery and fieldwork for the following 14 weeks, and reporting for the final seven weeks.
In its pitch to the county for the contract, BerryDunn pointed to the size of past clientele: 650 state, local, and quasi-governmental clients nationwide. Among those, BerryDunn completed election-related engagements for the New Hampshire secretary of state from 2020 to 2021 concerning its CARES Act elections assistance and grant management.
Within Maricopa County, BerryDunn has undertaken other non-elections projects over the last decade: the Adobe Dam Recreation Center Feasibility Study, Adult Probation Case Management Consultant, Adult Probation Department – Victim Services Review, Cyber Security Risk Assessment for the Judicial Branch, Housing Choice Voucher Forensic Audit Services for the Housing Authority, Information Security Program Maturity Assessment, Parks Fee Analysis, Regional County Parks Master Planning Services, and Sheriff’s Office Bonds, Fines, and Court Order Processing Audit.
Aside from Maricopa County, BerryDunn has contracted with many local and state entities within Arizona in the past: the Departments of Agriculture, Economic Security (and its Division Of Developmental Disabilities), and Health Services; the Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System; the State Land Department; Coconico, Maricopa, and Pima counties; the cities of Avondale, Glendale, Goodyear, Mesa, Phoenix, Scottsdale, Surprise, Tempe, and Tucson; and the towns of Gilbert, Prescott Valley, Queen Creek, and Sahuarita.
Several months ago, BerryDunn entered a $7.25 million class action lawsuit settlement over a 2023 data breach affecting over 1.1 million individuals. The data breach compromised the names, addresses, dates of birth, Social Security numbers, and health insurance policy numbers for the affected individuals.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
Maricopa County Supervisor Mark Stewart is hoping the latest Shared Services Agreement (SSA) approved unanimously this week by the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors wins approval by Maricopa County Recorder Justin Heap.
In a statement, Stewart wrote, “Yesterday, the Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to send a new draft of the Shared Services Agreement (SSA) concerning election responsibilities to Maricopa County Recorder, Justin Heap. This updated draft incorporates feedback from the Recorder’s Office. To be clear, this is not the final version of the SSA. The Recorder will now have the opportunity to review the document, propose additional revisions, and return it to the Board for further consideration.
He added, “Based on my discussions with Recorder Heap and members of the Board, we are 95% of the way towards finalizing the SSA. I am more optimistic about this process than at any point previously and am confident that we will reach a signed agreement in the near future.”
Board Chairman Thomas Galvin wrote in a statement Thursday, “For months, the Board and its staff have been negotiating details of a new SSA in good faith. It’s time the public knows the full story, and this latest agreement includes many concessions from our Board.”
In a statement released the same day, and later retracted, shared by several outlets, Heap wrote, “The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors presentation today was one side of an ongoing negotiation. Recorder Heap disagrees with some statements that were made; however, his focus remains on getting an elections agreement in place that best serves the voters of Maricopa County. The agreement put forth by the Board today represents the framework of a deal, but the devil is in the details, and those details still need to be ironed out. Recent delays in the negotiation stem from the Recorder’s need to secure more adequate counsel.
“With the appointment of former Arizona Supreme Court Justice Andrew Gould to assist in the negotiations, Recorder Heap anticipates and looks forward to a successful resolution and agreement in the near future.”
Under Arizona law, the responsibility for the management of elections falls between the County Boards of Supervisors and County Recorders. Ostensibly Shared Service Agreements delineate the responsibilities of each body to increase efficiency and prevent unnecessary spending.
Supervisor Debbie Lesko expressed herself as being “beyond frustrated,” with the process saying, “After the April 11th meeting between Recorder Heap and Supervisors Galvin and Brophy-McGee, Justin texted me saying the meeting ‘went very well, we seem to be in agreement on 95% and are only discussing minor details on how to effectively split the IT team.’ Our lawyer writes up the agreement based on the meeting and then, next thing I know, Justin fires his attorney and we seem to be back to square one.”
Supervisor Kate Brophy McGee laid the difficulties directly at the feat of the County Recorder saying, “Recorder Heap has not been a trustworthy partner in these negotiations. He doesn’t seem to know what he wants. He doesn’t seem to understand his statutory responsibilities. The only thing he seems to be really good at is threatening lawsuits. But there’s time for him to change. He can come back to the table and sign this agreement. I hope he does. Successful elections in Maricopa County depend on it.”
As of this report Recorder Heap has not released a revised statement, nor explained why the initial statement was taken down.
A bill to strengthen the prohibition on using public resources to influence an election is winding through the Arizona legislature.
Sponsored by Sen. John Kavanagh (R-LD3), SB 1036 was passed by the Arizona State Senate last month. The bill clarifies penalties for violations and grants residents the ability to file lawsuits against government entities accused of misusing taxpayer funds for political purposes.
SB 1036 expands Arizona’s existing laws prohibiting public entities—including cities, towns, counties, and school districts—from using government resources to sway election outcomes. Under the bill, a resident of a jurisdiction where a violation occurs can file a lawsuit in superior court. If the court rules in favor of the resident, any civil penalties collected would be paid directly to the resident. The definition of “influencing an election” is broadened to include any presentation of information that is not neutral or impartial, and courts may impose fines of up to $5,000 per violation, plus additional penalties equal to the value of misused public resources.
Arizona law has long prohibited public entities from using government resources—such as taxpayer funds, public facilities, and government personnel—to support or oppose candidates or ballot measures. However, concerns over enforcement and legal loopholes have led lawmakers to introduce additional measures like SB 1036.
Supporters argue that the bill strengthens accountability by giving residents the power to challenge government misuse in court. They believe it will deter public officials from using taxpayer money for political purposes.
SB 1036 passed through the Senate’s Government Committee with a 4-3 vote. The bill now sits in the House for further debate.
Senator Kavanagh has emphasized the importance of maintaining the integrity of taxpayer-funded resources, stating, “This bill ensures that public funds are not used to tip the scales in elections. Voters should have confidence that their tax dollars are not being used for political agendas.”
As the legislation progresses, Arizona lawmakers and voters will continue to debate the balance between election transparency and government communications.
Jonathan Eberle is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
The Arizona State Legislature is reviewing several election-related bills aimed at tightening voter registration rules, increasing transparency in election mailings, and preventing potential voter fraud.
Sponsored by Rep. John Gillette (LD-30), the three bills—HB 2004, HB 2006, and HB 2007—focus on restricting voter registration mailings, requiring disclosures on election-related mailings, banning payment incentives for voter registration, and limiting third-party election mailers. Supporters argue these measures will protect election integrity.
This bill prohibits Arizona county recorders from sending voter registration cards to mailing addresses outside the state, with exceptions for military personnel and overseas voters covered under federal law as well as Arizona residents without in-state postal service access.
Supporters argue this bill prevents potential voter fraud by ensuring only Arizona residents receive registration materials at valid in-state addresses. HB 2004 passed the House Floor (33-27-1) and is now under Senate consideration.
HB 2006: Requiring Disclosures on Election Mailings
Under this bill, any nongovernmental entity that mails or delivers election-related documents—such as voter registration applications or early ballot requests—must include the phrase “not from a government agency” on the envelope. The requirement applies to third-party voter registration groups, political organizations, and nonprofit advocacy groups.
Proponents argue this measure prevents voter confusion and ensures recipients can differentiate between official government communications and third-party outreach. HB 2006 passed the House Floor (37-19-4) and is advancing to the Senate.
HB 2007: Prohibiting Payment for Voter Registration Quotas
This bill bans individuals or organizations from paying or receiving compensation based on the number of voter registration forms collected, completed, or submitted.
Currently, government agencies, political parties, and private organizations conducting voter registration drives receive state and federal voter registration forms at no cost. However, this bill would ensure that voter registration efforts are not incentivized by financial compensation, which supporters say prevents fraudulent or rushed registrations. HB 2007 passed the House Floor (34-23-3) and is now under Senate review.
The Arizona Senate is expected to debate these bills in the coming weeks. As lawmakers debate these measures, Arizona voters will be watching closely to see how the changes may impact future elections.
Jonathan Eberle is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
