by Staff Reporter | May 8, 2026 | News
By Staff Reporter |
The sole Maricopa County supervisor to extend support for the county recorder over the ongoing elections authority spat has requested court assistance with mediation.
In a filing last week in County Recorder Justin Heap’s case against the board of supervisors before the Maricopa County Superior Court, Supervisor Mark Stewart filed a response amending his vote from opposition against to support for his fellow supervisors’ motion to stay the ruling.
Some interpreted the filing as Stewart backtracking his support for the recorder. Stewart has sided with Heap generally on the proper division of elections authority.
Stewart said ongoing mediation attempts have failed and required court intervention.
“Supervisor Stewart supports a temporary stay solely for the purpose of mediation,” stated the filing. “Previous efforts at mediation have failed despite the parties all claiming a willingness to mediate based upon timing, preconditions, and disagreement over the mediator.”
Stewart requested the court order Heap and the board to attend a mediation before the court appointed mediator within the next two weeks.
In a video posted online, Stewart explained that his filing was not a challenge to the court ruling, like the motion put forth by his colleagues, but simply a means to “alleviate some of the operational ambiguity” within remaining questions of operations so that board and recorder staff could move forward.
“What we do not need is to prolong this conflict. We need a defined path forward,” said Stewart. “While we may have different views on the path forward, I know we all have the same goal of delivering reliable, secure, transparent elections for Maricopa voters.”
Stewart said he didn’t want the case to go to appeal. That was something his fellow supervisors desired.
Last month, the superior court ruled in Heap’s favor and restored the county recorder’s election powers. The court rejected the board’s claim of plenary authority and declared it had acted unlawfully beyond statutory authority. A specific finding of wrongdoing concerned the removal of personnel, systems, and equipment from the recorder’s office.
The court warned, further, that continued absconding of election powers by the board of supervisors would likely result in voter disenfranchisement.
“The evidence at trial established that the Recorder’s inability to exercise meaningful control over election systems and staff will likely cause concrete operational harms, including inability to timely process provisional ballots under A.R.S. § 16-134, resulting in voters being denied tabulation of the full ballots they had voted and to which they were entitled,” stated the ruling. “These harms will not resolve and may likely increase absent court intervention, particularly as general election cycles approach.”
The board argued in a filing earlier this week that the court’s ruling conflicted with state statute and would interfere with administration of the upcoming jurisdictional election scheduled to occur in less than two weeks.
“This ruling creates confusion about key aspects of election administration including chain of custody, on-site tabulation, and the handing of mail-in ballots on Election Day,” said Board of Supervisors Chair Kate Brophy McGee in a statement. “Making major changes in the middle of the election cycle is not just a terrible idea for voters, it’s going to be almost impossible to implement responsibly.”
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
by Staff Reporter | Apr 20, 2026 | News
By Staff Reporter |
The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors are split over the court ruling ordering a restoration of election powers to the county recorder.
On Friday, the Maricopa County Superior Court invalidated the board’s claim of “plenary authority” via its general supervisory powers over elections administration.
“The board’s general authority does not override specific statutory delegations to other county officers,” read the ruling.
The court found that the board had “acted unlawfully and exceeded its statutory authority” by taking the recorder’s personnel, systems, and equipment. The ruling warned the board continuing in its path of harboring the recorder’s election resources would likely result in the disenfranchisement of voters.
“The evidence at trial established that the Recorder’s inability to exercise meaningful control over election systems and staff will likely cause concrete operational harms, including inability to timely process provisional ballots under A.R.S. § 16-134, resulting in voters being denied tabulation of the full ballots they had voted and to which they were entitled,” stated the ruling. “These harms will not resolve and may likely increase absent court intervention, particularly as general election cycles approach.”
The ruling ordered the board to allow the recorder to take up those duties expressly given to him by state law, and to fund all necessary expenses the recorder sets forth. The board was also ordered to return all IT staff, servers, databases, software, websites, and equipment to the recorder, or to fund replacement of those personnel and items.
Chairwoman Kate Brophy McGee disagreed with the court’s view that Recorder Justin Heap has authority in his own right over elections. McGee also contended with the court’s conclusion that the board had deprived the recorder of resources and staffing.
McGee said the board plans to appeal.
“The court correctly concluded that the Board oversees the county budget and makes all appropriations decisions. But I disagree with other portions of the ruling, and I will explore all options with the Board of Supervisors, including an expeditious appeal,” said McGee. “From day one, the Board of Supervisors has provided Recorder Heap the resources and staffing needed to fulfill his statutory duties. We will continue to do so because voters always come first.”
Unlike the rest of the board, Supervisor Mark Stewart issued his own statement expressing support for the court ruling. Stewart challenged the idea that the entire court fight was unavoidable.
“From the beginning, I supported a more transparent, public negotiation process, an approach that could have led to a different outcome and avoided unnecessary confusion, litigation, and cost,” said Stewart. “It is now time to move forward with a unified focus and give our team the resources they need to deliver transparent, secure, and best-in-class elections that the voters of Maricopa County deserve.”
Recorder Heap celebrated the ruling as redress for what he called an unjust “power grab” of his office’s elections authority.
“With this ruling, we will move forward focused on delivering the secure, transparent, and accessible elections the voters of Maricopa County deserve,” said Heap.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
by Staff Reporter | Mar 4, 2026 | News
By Staff Reporter |
The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors and Recorder are at odds over plans to establish early voting locations.
Maricopa County Supervisor Mark Stewart, who has been an independent voice within the board, addressed two public concerns with this dispute in a press release issued on Monday.
The concerns relate to the delegation of early voting responsibilities under Arizona law, and the timeline for finalizing early voting locations, staffing, and logistics. Stewart disclosed that conversations between the board and recorder’s officer were underway, even with the very public back-and-forth between the two bodies.
“Regardless of the back-and-forth or expressed frustrations from the Recorder’s office and the Board Chair, we are making progress and working together. It may not be perfect, but it is happening,” said Stewart.
The final week of February marked a particularly fraught period in a long-standing dispute between the board and recorder over election duties. At the center of it all was the disputed existence of a spreadsheet containing alternative early voting locations.
Last week Recorder Justin Heap publicly disparaged the proposed early voting location sites delivered to him by the board. His criticisms accused the board of potentially disenfranchising voters, prompting an immediate response from Board Chair Kate Brophy McGee and Vice Chair Debbie Lesko. The pair said Heap had misinterpreted and failed to adequately review the materials given to him.
Heap disputed this narrative of his review. He accused the board of “lying to voters yet again,” in addition to demanding that he approve their early voting proposal.
According to Stewart’s press release from Monday, none of the early voting locations have been approved yet. The sites under discussion remain proposals.
Early voting locations were approved and released by mid-June during the 2024 election cycle.
This year, the election schedule is slightly more condensed. The governor and legislature approved a modification of the election dates to accommodate military and overseas voters.
Voter registration ends June 22, early voting begins June 24, and the primary election day is scheduled for the end of July.
Even with this adjusted timeline, Stewart says Heap has “ample time” to provide feedback on the proposed voting locations.
“We have a reasonable window of time to gather the Recorder’s feedback and a commitment to work collaboratively to refine location recommendations and ensure the selections are operationally sound and accessible to voters,” said Stewart.
While the rest of the supervisors have operated virtually in lockstep in their approach to the recorder, Stewart has generally taken a position independent of the rest of the board.
Lately, the supervisor is urging his colleagues to review the proposed early voting locations in an open public session to gather constituent input. Stewart advised he would be recommending a public discussion date in which Heap may participate.
“Voters deserve to see the decision-making process, understand the rationale behind site selection, and hear directly from both the Board and the Recorder,” said Stewart. “Transparency strengthens trust and improves outcomes.”
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
by Staff Reporter | Mar 2, 2026 | News
By Staff Reporter |
The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors (MCBOS) issued its polling place map for early voting, but the Maricopa County Recorder says its uneven distribution may disenfranchise voters.
Recorder Justin Heap issued a letter on Thursday to the MCBOS expressing these concerns. Heap said he doesn’t support the plan.
“I have serious concerns that the proposed early voting plan [the Board] provided makes voting inconvenient and inaccessible for a large number of Maricopa County voters,” said Heap. “I cannot support a plan that does not provide all voters a reasonably equal opportunity to vote. I remain willing to work in good faith. But cooperation does not mean rubber-stamping a plan my office had no role in building, and which fails to adequately protect the voters.”
According to the map, areas with higher population counts have significantly less early voting sites compared to areas with lower population counts. As an example, Tempe (population 180,000) has three designated early voting sites while Mesa (population 500,000) has one.
That Mesa voting site is not in the center of the city; it is located in the southeast corner, meaning most voters would have to travel over 10 miles to reach the location.
“That kind of imbalance makes voting more difficult in large portions of the county and risks leaving a substantial percentage of county voters without reasonable access to early voting,” said Heap. “Elections should be fair and accessible for everyone, regardless of where they live.”
In addition to those alleged troubles, Recorder Heap said that “no staff, funding, equipment, or planning authority” has been transferred to him by MCBOS as of the letter. Per Heap, the MCBOS Elections Director, Scott Jarrett, delivered to him an early voting plan on Monday developed without the involvement of his office and asked for an approval by Friday.
“Maricopa County voters made clear they seek us to have collaboration based on the statutory division of duties, rather than artificial deadlines or public narratives that obscure the facts and cause voter confusion,” said Heap.
Arizona law requires the board to provide funds and resources to the recorder’s office.
In response, Chair Kate Brophy McGee and Vice Chair Debbie Lesko issued a joint statement dismissing his claims as “misleading and disappointing.” McGee and Lesko said the board would continue to plan for Election Day regardless of Heap’s rejection of the plan.
“We offered to help him because he’s never done [early in-person voting] before, and time is of the essence,” read the joint statement. “We even gave him a list of more than 160 voting centers he could use or modify, but we can’t force him to accept our assistance.”
The board issued a letter on Tuesday to Heap asking whether he would accept Jarrett’s plan for early in-person voting. According to their letter, the plan opposed by Heap maintained consistency with practices implemented by Heap’s predecessors.
“The Board of Supervisors strongly supports maintaining a comprehensive early in-person program consistent with prior practices,” stated the letter.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
by Matthew Holloway | Feb 27, 2026 | News
By Matthew Holloway |
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.
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.”
Matthew Holloway is a senior reporter for AZ Free News. Follow him on X for his latest stories, or email tips to Matthew@azfreenews.com.
