Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes is suing Cochise County for giving nearly full powers to Cochise County election recorders, according to a lawsuit Mayes filed Tuesday.

Mayes thinks: Last week, when he agreed to authorize recorder David Stevens In conducting county elections, county supervisors did not make it sufficiently clear that they had the final say on certain decisions. Arizona Superior Court Complaint.

State law requires supervisors to approve decisions such as where vote centers are located, who is hired to cast the ballots, and finalize election results.

In a statement Tuesday, Mays equated the agreement with an “unconditional surrender” that could give Stevens the possibility of hiding future changes to the county’s elections from the public.

Mays said he was “deeply concerned that this move could obscure or obscure the actions and deliberations that the board normally conducts publicly under the Open Meeting Act.” .

Mayes asked the court to stop Stevens from exercising the powers conferred on him in the contract, to stop him and his supervisor from spending money related to the contract, to to recover the money to do, and void the contract.

already, Mays investigating possible violation of state public assembly law A letter her office sent to supervisors last week said it related to the board’s election administration decisions over the past few months.

Mays, a Democrat, said he was trying to complete a full tally of the ballots cast in last November’s election and that the Republican-controlled board of governors in Southern Arizona County were found guilty of violating state law for the second time. is aimed at. He refused to certify the county’s election results.Overseers have begun to consider giving Stevens — election skeptic with close ties to former Republican secretary of state candidate Mark Finkem — More power over elections after county elections administrator Lisa Mara refused to agree to an illegal handcount and Stevens backed it. Mara eventually resignedrefers to harassment and defamation.

Two Republicans on the board, Supervisors Tom Crosby and Peggy Judd, approved the new deal with Stevens on February 28. According to Mays’ complaint, the supervisor also stepped forward against the advice of the county attorney who agreed the plan was illegal.

Crosby, who was reached by phone on Tuesday, said he believed the supervisor had the authority to sign the deal. However, he and Judd also said they were clear when they were willing to make modifications if necessary.

“We’ve said from the beginning that if we needed to adjust the deal, we could adjust it,” Crosby said. “That is, perhaps [Mayes] I come up with really good ideas. ”

Crosby said he wanted to go ahead with the deal despite Mays’ warnings because of the timeliness of the matter. needed an interim election administrator. Crosby said Stevens was the best choice.

The agreement gave Stevens the power to run elections and appoint permanent election administrators until shortly after the November 2024 presidential election.

Cochise County is not the first county to impose duties on its registrar beyond those required by law. Arizona law divides duties between overseers, who oversee polling place administration, ballot counting, and election day voting, and registries, overseeing early voting and voter registration. However, Maricopa County has allowed its registrants to hold county elections for decades, and Yuma County does this now as well.

Secretary of State Adrian Fontes recently told Votebeat that he believes counties should have the power to make decisions that best suit their needs.

but Mays said in her statement The law allows the county to give registries more electoral duties, but the Cochise County agreement “does not permit both agencies to work together to discharge their statutory duties openly and transparently,” thus drawing a line. is beyond

“Counties can properly enter into cooperation agreements with Recorders to govern elections, but Cochise County’s agreement goes far beyond legal boundaries,” Mays wrote.

For example, the agreement appears to illegally give the recorder powers overseeing the hiring of election staff, determining budgets, and presenting the final results of county elections.

“Section 5 waives the game. It stipulates that election officials shall report to and act under the supervision of the Registrar. [to advise him on] All election and district-related matters within the statutory responsibilities of the Board,” the complaint reads.

Stevens has long expressed doubts about the security of elections, repeating many unsubstantiated Republican arguments about the security of mail-in ballots and tallying machines. he told Votebeat He believes Cochise County should do away with machines and instead talk about counting ballots by hand, calling for state grants to add unprecedented security features such as watermarks to county ballots. Pursue.

Mays worries that Stevens could go ahead with decisions without the public knowing, as opposed to supervisors, who had to approve decisions in public.

“If defendants are allowed to enforce the agreement, Cochise County residents could be deprived of the full transparency they are entitled to regarding public officials’ deliberations regarding systemic changes to the conduct of elections. Yes,” the complaint states.

“Votebeat is a non-profit news organization covering local election integrity and voter access. Sign up for newsletter here”