Maricopa County’s elected officials have generally been on the same page when it comes to elections in recent years. They have defended the country’s election administration and pushed back against conspiracy theories and disinformation circulating about it.

However, the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors will be adding three new members in January: Debbie Lesko, Kate Brophy McGee and Mark Stewart.

The new recorder, Justin Heap, will also take the oath of office. And some of these newly elected officials include people who have questioned elections in Maricopa County in the past.

Jen Fifield, Votebeat Senior Reporter, I wrote about thisjoined the show to talk about what this means going forward. First, we started wondering whether with a new supervisor and a new recorder coming in, there is a possibility that some of these officials might not be on the same page regarding elections.

whole conversation

Jen Field: No doubt they even named it “One Maricopa” where everyone responds. You know, right now, they’re united in advocating for each other, and that’s built on mutual trust, which I believe they’ve built themselves and with their electoral departments.

They also know a lot about elections at this point. I think the biggest change here is new people coming in who want to see change, who want to ask questions, who want to understand the system. It may mean questioning the system too much in public.

Mark Brody: So, to your point, there are at least a few people here who might be what you might call election skeptics, if not outright election deniers.

field: Yes, especially the new recorder, Justin Heap. He has repeatedly called county elections a laughing stock. He said the voter rolls were dirty and needed to be cleaned. He was hired under then-Recorder Adrian Fontes, a radical Democrat, and talked about how long-term staff there had worked there. He’s now Secretary of State.

Therefore, he definitely wants to join the Supervisory Board and make some changes. Mark Stewart of Chandler also said he doesn’t think the pair’s mistakes in the 2020 election should have happened. You need to change your process. So at least the two of them have been talking about changes on a pretty broad scale.

Brody: Has new Recorder Justin Heap specifically said what he wants to do, or are there any hints of what he’s going to do that he’s sponsored or voted for in Congress? Can I consider a bill that I have voted against?

field: He never answered my calls since he started running. But if you look at his legislative record, as you said, he introduced a bill to improve ballot tracking. They call it a chain of custody that tracks where each ballot goes. It has been closed twice, bills on that topic. He wanted to support any bill that would eliminate early voting, eliminate voting anywhere in the county, and return to precinct-based voting.

However, his role here is limited. So it’s not like he can come in and overhaul the system. Many of these belong to and are under the authority of the supervisor.

Brody: Right, and as you write, between the superintendent and the recorder of who does what and who is responsible for the changes that have taken place over the past few years, including most recently. Something like an arrangement. But you report that it wouldn’t be such a big shock if that agreement could be reopened and reworked with a new superintendent and new recorder.

field: I think it’s almost certain that they’ll get in there and work on an agreement on who’s going to do what now and whether a majority will agree to the changes. For example, supervisory support was taken away from the recorder, and as you know, the management of ballot drop boxes, which are controversial in the state.

So that’s something they’ve picked up off the recorder over the last year or so. And something like that might lead to Justin Heap coming in and saying, “We’d like to control that,” and seeing if we can negotiate and get a majority to agree. .

Brody: All of this is very interesting in the sense that we’ve never really seen nearly the same degree of election denialism and fraud that we’ve seen over the past two cycles, especially in Maricopa County. . How do people who have come to the county, or have worked in the county for a while, view this moment, and where do those who trust elections compare to others? , I’m wondering. may come in and there may be changes they want to make.

field: Well, I know some people have joked to me and said, “The election is fair now, right?” You know, it’s like the joke that Trump won and people stopped worrying so much about the election. But there’s still an underlying level of uncertainty and voter distrust across the state that’s not going to go away, and I think it’s going to be necessary. I think regulators still have the leverage to make changes when they are heard. Voters know how little trust they have in the current system.

Brody: The county obviously does a lot more than just elections, right? Like we have the county budget and all sorts of other agencies within Maricopa County. You know, has anyone suggested that now that the distrust in elections has subsided a little bit, regulators might be able to get back to doing other things that they’re supposed to be doing? Do they take responsibility for it and really focus on it instead of just spending as much time as they think they have to deal with it?

field: Actually, I think that’s something I’ve been thinking about for four years now. When will we come back to this? You know, after the audit that reviewed the 2020 election, they thought, “Oh, let’s get back to it.” And then Kali Lake and her claims started spreading, and it was back in the 2024 cycle.

I think we’re going to see a lull here. So can they act on some of the priorities that they’re going to look at, like a new transport tax and things like tax rates that come from a business perspective? I think there will be some free time, but who knows if the new cycle will start again?

Brody: Yes. Does it seem like there’s actually an area of ​​agreement between the Recorder and the Administrator and the various supervisors that we can all agree on in terms of what can be done to improve elections?

field: One thing that is certain is the speed with which election results are released. Four of the five supervisors I spoke to, and Justin Heap, who we also know, are doing something internally, whether it’s working with state legislators to change laws like counting schedules. We are also interested in reducing the time it takes to see results. Add more staff, add more machines, add more things to get results faster.

Brody: Yeah, that’s interesting. One bill that has been introduced in advance in Congress would essentially abolish so-called late voters, giving people who submit early votes past a certain point near Election Day a signature when they drop off their ballot. was required to be presented. It’s about trying to speed up that process, achieving the same goal you were just talking about.

field: Well, I have a few different ideas. One, as you know, instead of having voters drop off their early ballots and have them verify their signatures later, have them show identification when they arrive with their early ballots. That’s it. And one of them is not allowing that kind of behavior in voting centers, which would be a big change. But our governor hasn’t supported it yet, but let’s see how that changes. Many things are being discussed in the Diet.