Tucson, Arizona (KGUN) — Update:
After hearing just under an hour of arguments, the court ruled against Attorney General Chris Mays and the state of Arizona, and the Cochise County Board of Supervisors gave the county registrar several powers within the scope of legal rights. The board did not exceed its powers, interpreting state law as operating within.
Judge Howard Fell said, “The board has the power to delegate to recorders at least some electoral duties not specifically authorized by law.”
——
Members of the Cochise County Board of Supervisors and the county registrar will appear in court on Tuesday as they face a preliminary injunction from the state of Arizona over a move to delegate election affairs to the registrar’s office.
In legal documents, the country calls the board’s move part of a “pattern of going beyond statutory powers on elections.”
In response, board members said the intergovernmental agreement with county registrar David Stevens was no different from previous arrangements with election officials, and the functioning of the role would be under the board’s oversight. said.
The board voted two to one in late February (about a month after the resignation of elections officer Lisa Mara) to assign election duties to county registrar David Stevens.
According to Arizona Attorney General Chris Mays, the delegation of his duties crossed a “legal line,” a public statement said: Acting publicly under the Public Assembly Act. ”
When the legally controversial 2022 election cycle came to an end in Cochise County, it was one of the big picture.
In November, the Board voted 2-1 to order a full hand-count audit of the ballots. This was later ruled by the Cochise County Superior Court to be an illegal act outside the state’s statutory audit process. The commission also received a court order to certify the election results in late November after voting 2-1 to delay certification by a statewide deadline.
In Tuesday’s court filing of the preliminary injunction, the state consolidated voting rights into county registrars ahead of May’s special election for a proposed tax to fund a new prison district. By doing so, you are citing “ignore” state law.
On May 16, 2023, Cochise County will hold a special election in which voters will decide whether to approve taxes to fund the new prison district. Two months before the deadline for registering and voting for that election, the Board of Supervisors entered into a contract (the “Contract”) with county registrar David Stevens. recorder.
This effective transfer of board authority to the county registrar has no legal basis and threatens the right of Cochise County residents to hold elections lawfully and transparently. The State has taken this step to prevent and remedy these damages. But the court can’t ring the county voter bell once the defendant begins enforcing the agreement and exercising (or waiving) its powers in connection with the next special election. Therefore, the State respectfully requests the Court to prevent the Defendant from enforcing this Agreement in advance.
In the commission’s and registrar’s responses to the injunction, they said their arrangement was “perfectly legal,” indicating that some of the state’s motions were ambiguous.
Consolidating functions into one office is common and not illegal, as the Attorney General himself admits. But the only question is the IGA being challenged, as the Attorney General claims it has “crossed the legal line.” Of course, the Attorney General never says where this line lies, nor does he provide this Court with any standard by which to determine which contracts are legal and which are not. It seems to be one of the situations.
More problematic for the state’s position is that in order to challenge the Challenged IGA, the state is essentially forced to misrepresent the Challenged IGA. In short, the Challenged IGA does not transfer or delegate power to anyone. It simply assigns another person the responsibility of managing board functions in the same way that the board has previously done to the election commissioner.
These flaws aside, the biggest flaw in the state’s argument is that, despite the state’s call for an immediate solution ahead of the Cochise County Jail District vote on May 16, 2023, “Any Constituency ignoring the fact that the governing body of the electoral district approved by the governing body of To conduct elections, you may contract for election services with the board of oversight and the county registrar. ARS § 408(D) (emphasis added). For the only election where a Challenged IGA is likely to be effective is the Prison District Administration, a Special Tax District licensed under ARS § 48-4001 et seq. Apart from the Board of Supervisors, you can contract with the County Registrar anyway.
Watch KGUN 9 live on Tuesdays at 5pm and 6pm. Craig Smith elaborates on this story.
——-
Anne Simmons Digital content producer for KGUN 9. Anne started her career in television while a student at the University of Arizona. Before he joined KGUN, he managed multiple public access television stations in the Bay Area and worked as a video producer in the non-profit sector. Share story ideas and key issues with Anne via email anne.simmons@kgun9.com or by connecting Instagram, twitter again LinkedIn.
