The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors has sent a letter to Maricopa County Recorder Justin Heap regarding preparations for in-person early voting for the upcoming July Primary Election, urging cooperation to ensure sufficient voting locations, staff, and equipment are in place.
In a joint statement dated Feb. 24, 2026, Board Chair Kate Brophy McGee and Vice Chair Debbie Lesko said the board delivered the letter to Recorder Heap now that his office “oversees that important function.”
The supervisors emphasized that “big decisions need to be made in short order” to guarantee that in-person early voting is adequately staffed and resourced for the 27-day early voting period prescribed by state law.
The letter requests that Heap provide the “same level of service that Maricopa County voters have come to expect in past years, when the Board oversaw in-person early voting.” The supervisors wrote that this includes a “large number of sites spread out evenly and fairly across our county” during the early voting period.
NEW: BOS sets a 2/27 deadline for Recorder to say if he intends to partner with @maricopavote to provide in-person early voting in 2026. His decision will have a big impact on voters, candidates, ballot measures. Statement below from Chair @katemcgeeaz and Vice Chair @DebbieLeskopic.twitter.com/igMJLMyVU3
Brophy McGee and Lesko also asked whether the recorder would collaborate with the board’s elections department, which they described as “staffed, resourced, and experienced in this area.”
According to the Board’s Feb. 24 statement, the letter followed a court filing by Recorder Heap in which he indicated he was willing to cooperate on logistical issues. Supervisors also said they had sent a staff-level communication outlining key decisions that must be made to meet statutory deadlines.
The board approved a requested $550,000 budget increase for the Recorder’s Office, earmarked for signature verification efforts. “Signature verification is under the complete and total control of the recorder,” Brophy McGee stated in a press release on Wednesday regarding the $550,000 increase. “While we have questions about the recorder’s new process, we will proceed with the recorder’s budget requests to ensure sufficient resources are in place by the 2026 primary. Our top goal is fair and secure elections.”
The supervisors gave Heap until Friday to respond to the board’s letter so that preparations can proceed in advance of statutory deadlines for the July Primary. The statement concludes that if the recorder does not respond, the board will assume he can manage in-person early voting “without our help.”
The Maricopa County Recorder’s Office recovered $500,000 in overcharges from the federal postal agency.
County Recorder Justin Heap reported during Wednesday’s board of supervisors meeting that the United States Postal Service (USPS) had overcharged Maricopa County for “several years,” to the tune of $500,000. The recorder advised the supervisors that their office worked with USPS to recoup those lost funds.
“We discovered the United States Postal Services has been overcharging Maricopa County for quite a few years. We have worked with them, we will be receiving a refund of $500,000 from USPS to help defray the costs of everything going forward,” said Heap. “We used to give awards in this county for people who save the county money, now we get subpoenas.”
$500,000 makes up about two percent of the recorder’s budget under the 2026 fiscal year budget. It amounts to a little over one percent of the 2025 fiscal year budget.
The revelation of the recovered $500,000 emerged during a special meeting called by the board of supervisors requiring Heap to testify on the administration of his office and claims of disenfranchisement — a meeting which Heap made clear he opposed.
“This reaches to the level of administrative interference. We’re in the middle of an election, I’ve had to pull certified election officers off of this election to spend time compiling this report and these documents to comply with this demand,” said Heap.
Heap brought the report which he said contained “thousands of pages of documents” providing evidence of his office’s administration. The recorder said the compilation of this report strained his office due to the constrained timeline of less than a week.
As to the disenfranchisement claims that emerged during Maricopa County Superior Court testimony last month, Heap said the recorder’s office has struggled in previous elections to complete provisional ballots under the condensed time frame. In order to solve that problem, Heap asked the board for an Agilis sorting machine. That sorter would cost just under $600,000.
The recorder said relying on Runbeck for provisional processing wouldn’t be advisable considering their company doesn’t connect to the county’s voter database, and the requirement of transporting the ballots to Runbeck would expose the county to chain of custody complications.
Heap said disenfranchisement hasn’t occurred “so far this year” under his administration, and that claims made during court testimony were referencing past administrations. One of the staff members who cited disenfranchisement during their testimony, chief of staff Sam Stone, retained his own counsel.
Supervisor Thomas Galvin asked Heap to explain why the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office (MCAO) said they had not approved universal mail-in ballots during last year’s congressional district 7 special election, when the recorder’s office said they had.
Heap rejected the characterization of those mail ballots. He said his office only made a proposal to send ballots to a selection of 3,000 voters who lacked a polling place, but didn’t act on it.
“This proposal was not even put in our plan to the MCAO, and we never implemented it, I’m not sure why the board has continued to hang up on a proposal that was never actually implemented,” said Heap.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
The Arizona Republican Party is picking sides in the ongoing spat between the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors and County Recorder Justin Heap.
The party’s new chair, Sergio Arellano, issued a press release on Tuesday commending Supervisor Mark Stewart for speaking out against the rest of the board for their posturing to oust Heap from office.
“I appreciate those Republicans who are able to ignore the rancor being generated by those outside the process, and who are willing to listen to the voices of those of us who want a solution that unites Republicans behind the proposition that Arizona voters deserve a process that respects their choices, and that the power of the people, exercised through their vote, prevails and is honored,” said Arellano.
Arellano advised voters to focus on the merits of policy over the noise of personal conflicts in the matter; the chair agreed with Stewart that Heap should have full restoration of elections administration duties under the Shared Services Agreement (SSA).
“Ignore the fake news and those who are intent on whipping up hysteria to further their own personal ambition, but we as a Party must deliver on real and effective reform and restore full faith in our elections,” said Arellano. “Recorder Heap must be allowed to do his job and then he must do it properly. The same goes for our County Supervisors. I am grateful to Supervisor Stewart for seeking a path that accomplishes all of this and encourage everyone involved to follow his lead and reach an agreement of which we might all be proud.”
The board ordered Heap to appear on Wednesday to provide a report and testify on his administration and allegations of voter disenfranchisement made by his office.
It is the latest escalation in the public spat between the two over who has primary control over elections via the SSA. The current SSA, all but gutting the recorder’s office of elections duties, was put in place by a “lame duck” recorder, Stephen Richer, and board majority in their final months in office. After Heap failed to convince the board to reverse course on that SSA, Heap sued last summer.
Supervisor Stewart announced on Monday that he sought outside legal counsel to negotiate with Heap over the SSA, since the board and recorder’s office appear to have hit a stalemate.
Stewart retained counsel after failing to receive a response to his request to postpone Wednesday’s meeting from Chair Kate Brophy McGee. The supervisor said all members of the board ought to have additional time to consult with counsel about negotiations with Heap.
“My counsel requires additional time to fully evaluate the issues raised, assess the scope and legal basis for the required direct report, and advise me accordingly. Proceeding before that review is complete would not allow me to participate in the discussion or any potential vote with the preparation and confidence that such a consequential action demands,” said Stewart. “Out of respect for the institution, the Recorder’s Office, and most importantly, the residents we serve, I believe it is prudent to delay consideration of this item until all members of the Board have had sufficient opportunity to consult with counsel and fully assess the implications.”
A Call for a Pause and Clarity
This morning I sent a letter to the Board Chair requesting we postpone Wednesday’s discussion to allow time for full staff participation and so the Board can meaningfully review the sworn report, Shared Services Agreement, and signature… pic.twitter.com/ITiVfuK8Gx
— Mark Stewart Maricopa County Supervisor District 1 (@MarkStewart_AZ) February 14, 2026
Stewart also denounced the possibility of Heap’s removal should he refuse to show on Wednesday.
The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors is divided on moving forward with a pathway that may result in the recorder’s removal, even with little time left before the primary election.
The board published a statement Wednesday announcing their vote requiring Recorder Justin Heap to provide a written report and sworn public testimony on February 18.
The board statement accused Heap of “lying to the public” and stonewalling the board.
“He has been unreliable. He has been unprofessional. He has been untruthful. He has been unaccountable,” read the statement. “The Board cannot responsibly set a budget, make policy decisions, or oversee county operations, including an active election in Tempe right now, without complete and truthful information from Mr. Heap.”
The board made its decision during its formal meeting on Wednesday. State law authorizes the board to require any county officer to make reports under oath concerning office duties.
The written report would address key issues identified in Chair Kate Brophy McGee’s letter to Heap last month concerning expenditures and prepayments, signature verification and curing, and the special election board and deputy registrar program.
Heap will also be required to provide the identities of the provisional voters his office said were disenfranchised; records of requests by his office for federal funds, legislative appropriations, or county funds; communications with the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office concerning the distribution of mail-in ballots to voters who didn’t request them in the 2025 special election in Congressional District 7; and records of the reassignment of the space in the Maricopa County Tabulation and Election Center from the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office to his office.
Although the supervisors voted unanimously to impose these requirements on Heap, not all supervisors supported the official statement condemning Heap.
Supervisor Mark Stewart said the statement wasn’t approved by him. Not only that, Stewart said, but the remarks were disrespectful and potentially damaging to current negotiations with Heap.
“We are in active negotiations on the Shared Services Agreement, and my focus remains on reaching a constructive resolution that delivers results for the people we serve,” said Stewart.
District 1 did not review or approve this post and does not share its tone.
I respect my colleagues, Recorder Heap, and most importantly our residents, and I believe our public communications should reflect that respect.
We are in active negotiations on the Shared Services…
— Mark Stewart Maricopa County Supervisor District 1 (@MarkStewart_AZ) February 12, 2026
Other supervisors fanned the flames of the statement.
Supervisor Debbie Lesko shared her remarks from Wednesday’s meeting, in which she said she endured over a year of frustrations with Heap. Lesko lodged multiple accusations against Heap, such as that he had something to hide.
“I feel Recorder Heap has left us no alternative,” said Lesko.
The only alternative for the board would be to continue negotiations with the recorder’s office through public discussions and the court.
This pathway by the board may lead to the largest county in the state and fourth-largest county in the nation without its elections leader with a few months left to go before elections begin. The primary election was moved up from August to July recently.
Should Heap refuse to comply with Wednesday’s order, the board may opt to remove the recorder from office with just five months to go before the primary elections.
This latest action by the board appears to be their response to the Maricopa County Superior Court striking down the board’s attempt to subpoena three staff members within Heap’s office. This court restraining order occurred within the case initiated by Heap last summer to restore elections powers to his office.
AZ Free News reached out to Heap regarding the board’s decision. As of this report, no response has been received.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
Several of the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors reviewed the recorder’s new signature verification process this week.
Supervisors Mark Stewart and Debbie Lesko visited the recorder’s office on Friday to observe what Recorder Justin Heap has promised to be a stronger approach to signature verification.
Also present were members of the Maricopa County Republicans and local election integrity advocates.
Currently with Maricopa County Recorder @azjustinheap, Supervisor @DebbieLesko, @MaricopaGOP, and several election integrity enthusiasts (@MerissaCaldwell) learning about the Recorder's new signature verification process.
— Mark Stewart Maricopa County Supervisor District 1 (@MarkStewart_AZ) February 6, 2026
Supervisor Stewart publicized some of the training materials given to elections workers tasked with signature verification, including metrics for accepting or flagging signatures based on broad and local characteristics.
The new format for signature verification has two levels of review, the first for the user and second for the manager. At the level one user review, two signature reviewers of differing political parties compare signatures with the reference signature on file.
Signatures with obvious matches based on characteristics may be accepted as good signatures, while signature comparisons that yield differences outweighing similarities must be flagged for level two review by a manager.
The level two managerial review concerns the review of all available signatures in a voter’s registration record, which can be upwards of 50 samples. The signature pool could include signatures from voter registration forms, verified early voting affidavits, and in-person sign-ins from rosters.
Signatures consistent with the signature pool would be approved and sent to another level two manager of a differing political party for review, while nonmatching signatures would be set aside for further action. The recorder’s office has a set limit of disposition types: no signature, household exchange, need packet (a catch-all disposition type), deceased (which flags National Voter Registration Act research), and pre-questioned signature.
That last disposition qualifies for automatic submission to another manager of a differing political party for level two review.
All signatures with any discrepancy at any levels are required to be part of a mandatory audit review, set at two percent currently.
Training materials also made clear the efforts by the recorder’s office to integrate user-friendly updates to signature review software.
Level one reviewer screens will display the current election affidavit signature alongside the historical affidavit signatures from newest to oldest, removing the old requirement for users to scroll to compare signatures.
The training materials also stressed that users should default to flagging signatures for review for any reasons other than a “good signature” determination.
The visit marked an unusual bright point in the strained relationship between the board and the recorder.
The board and recorder have been engaged in a year-long legal battle in the Maricopa County Superior Court over elections administration powers.
This week marked a particularly tenuous moment in the battle after board leadership issued subpoenas against three of the recorder’s staff members.
The Maricopa County Superior Court sided with the recorder on the issue and put in place a temporary restraining order against the board to halt the subpoenas.
Friday’s visit was not a signal by the two visiting supervisors that they were on the recorder’s side in this court battle. Lesko reposted statements from Board Chair Kate Brophy McGee addressing the subpoenas. Stewart issued his own statement recognizing the validity of arguments from both his fellow board members and the recorder’s office.
Supervisor Calls Out SSA Deadlock: Push for Transparent Talks, Voter-Centric Fixes, and Immediate Action
I have watched with growing frustration as the Board of Supervisors, our Elections Subcommittee, and the County Recorder’s Office have struggled to reach a resolution on the… pic.twitter.com/N1JRPQ1x5e
— Mark Stewart Maricopa County Supervisor District 1 (@MarkStewart_AZ) February 6, 2026
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
