A fight between Maricopa County Recorder Justin Heap and the Board of Supervisors over control of the county’s elections shows no sign of slowing down.
The brouhaha threatens to inject an unprecedented amount of instability and uncertainty into our fast-approaching elections.
Former Maricopa County Recorder Helen Purcell said she never ran into a situation like this during her three decades in office.
So, how did we get here?
KJZZ has been following every twist and turn of this saga for the better part of 19 months. Here are the key moments that led us to this point.
The lame-duck agreement
The moment that sparked the fight actually happened a few months before Heap took office when former Recorder Stephen Richer and the Board of Supervisors signed a new shared services agreement.
Those agreements divvy up election responsibilities between the two sides in accordance with Arizona law, which divides those duties between recorders and boards.
SSAs are usually uncontroversial. But this deal was unique, because Richer and the board signed on the dotted line in October 2024. That was just a few months after Heap defeated Richer in the Republican primary — and a few days before he defeated Democrat Tim Stringham in the general election.
The new agreement shifted some responsibilities away from the recorder to the board and also gave the supervisors complete authority over the recorder’s IT staff and systems.
Heap nixes the deal
After taking office, Heap panned the deal, accused the board and Richer of colluding to usurp his authority and effectively tore up the agreement.
That left Maricopa County without a plan to run its upcoming elections
For years, the county used shared services agreements to clean up the confusing parts of the state’s election laws and provide a clear plan for who controls what election tools and responsibilities.
The lack of an agreement could result in confusion for voters and election workers due to disagreements over who controls early ballot replacement sites, for instance, because the board has historically controlled that equipment but the recorder may actually hold the responsibility.
Both Richer and the board members who signed the agreement had said it was about “improving efficiencies.”
They wouldn’t say whether the decision to shift some responsibilities away from the recorder was made due to concerns about who would win that office after Heap beat Richer with the support of President Donald Trump and others who traffic in election fraud conspiracy theories.
The lawsuit
When he tore up the SSA, Heap also threatened to sue the board for allegedly usurping his authority.
He made good on that threat last June after both sides failed to negotiate a new shared services agreement.
The supervisors claimed they were actually close to a deal, citing a text from Heap to Supervisor Debbie Lesko in April claiming the sides were “in agreement on 95%” of the details.
Those types of exchanges would repeat themselves over the course of the next year, with both sides pointing the finger in the other direction and blaming the other for tanking negotiations.
The rulings
Heap has won two key victories in the election fight with the supervisors.
First, Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Scott Blaney ruled that Heap could retain his own attorney. That came after Maricopa County Attorney Rachel Mitchell sued over the recorder’s decision to use America First Legal, a law group founded by Trump adviser Stephen Miller.
Mitchell is now asking Blaney to clarify his order, accusing America First Legal’s James Rogers of overstepping the ruling by becoming Heap’s de facto legal counsel on all election issues.
In a second ruling, Blaney found the board did violate the law by removing Heap’s IT staff, though the Court of Appeals paused that ruling pending an appeal.
He also attempted to provide clarity on those pesky election laws at the center of the conflict by providing his interpretation of who controls each disputed election duty.
The fallout
But Blaney’s order did little to resolve the conflict.
A month ago, Heap and the board were again sparring over who controls the location of ballot drop boxes — an issue not directly addressed in the judge’s order.
Heap continues to accuse the board of willfully ignoring Blaney’s order — and recently asked the judge to hold the supervisors in contempt.
The board, meanwhile, accused Heap of negotiating in bad faith, pointing out they’ve funded new IT positions for his office and attempted to meet to hash out the rest of the agreements.
In a last-ditch effort to fix things, Blaney ordered both sides to meet with an independent mediator, discussions that were scheduled to begin June 30.
Absent a last-minute agreement, the dispute between the board and Heap will drag on through the July 21 primary and the general election in November.
However, the appeals court’s stay means the county won’t be required to make major changes to its election administration policies or split up the interconnected IT system used by both the recorder and the supervisors during an active election.
Heap appealed that stay to the Arizona Supreme Court, which is currently considering that request.
Arizona Supreme Court decision
The court ultimately decided the Purcell Principle could not be used as a pretext to deny Heap his authority as a county recorder under state law.
Chief Justice Ann Scott Timmer dissolved the Appeals Court stay and reissued Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Scott Blaney’s ruling that had defined which election duties belong to the board and which belong to the recorder under state law.
But Timmer also modified that order to adopt an interim plan proposed by Heap’s attorney to avoid disrupting the primary election as voters cast early ballots.
Throughout the court case, attorneys for the Board of Supervisors have argued that Blaney’s ruling would create chaos and confusion for poll workers and voters in upcoming elections by forcing the supervisors and recorder to come up with new election administration plans on the fly.
Timmer attempts to sidestep that issue by adopting the interim plan.
