Arizona Attorney General Sues County Officials Over Alleged Abuse of Power

Arizona Attorney General Kristin Mayes filed a lawsuit against Cochise County Board of Supervisors. She claimed that the board exceeded its authority by delegating almost all of the election duties to the county recorder.

“Suing other public officials is not something I take lightly—but it is my job as attorney general to bring action when public officials unlawfully exercise their power or act outside the confines of their authority,” Mayes declared in a statement March 7.

“The agreement is essentially an unqualified handover from the board to the recorder, not one that would allow both entities to work hand in hand to fulfill their statutory duties openly and transparently.”

The suit names the three board members as defendants: chairwoman Ann English and vice-chairwoman Peggy Judd; Tom Crosby; and David Sanders as county recorder.

The suit charges the board and the recorder with acting beyond the constitutional and legal limits and the misuse of public money. It asks for a judge’s declaration of the agreement illegal and inapplicable. 

The 19-page document claims among other things that Stevens accepted the agreement. “aggrandized his power” Board “unlawfully and almost completely offloaded the statutory duties over elections.”

Mayes claimed that Arizona counties were comparatively small. “may enter into cooperative agreements with their recorders to manage elections, Cochise County’s agreement steps far over the legal line.” 

“In addition to this broad transfer of power, I am deeply concerned this move might shield or obscure actions and deliberations the board would typically conduct publicly under open meeting law.”

The board voted 2 to 1 in favor of the 1-year agreement, signed Feb. 28. In it, the board and recorder agreed that all elections functions would be combined under one department to improve efficiency, cost savings, public confidence, and public trust.

English was the sole dissenting voter, declaring that the board was “acting in an inappropriate and unadvised fashion,” According to the lawsuit by the attorney General.

The agreement would make the recorder responsible for all aspects of election, including supervision of election workers, voter registration, early voting, and voter registration.

Mayes, a Democrat and plaintiff in the case, stated that the agreement threatened the lawful administration of elections and could threaten residents’ rights to vote.

‘Serious’ Concerns

“In shifting all election duties to the recorder—a distinct constitutional county officer—the agreement says not a word about how or whether the public may still have access to deliberations on matters that the board would normally consider in open meetings.”

“Without legislative authorization, a county body or officer may not give away its statutory powers or duties to another constitutionally established county body or officer, nor may it obtain the duties of another public body or officer or ‘assume power not conferred by statute,” The complaint says.

The Cochise County attorney was notified by the attorney general on February 27, 2012. “serious” There are concerns about the legality and validity of the agreement.

“Cochise County did not provide any legal authority in response,” The lawsuit states.

“This is not the first time that defendants have disregarded the law governing elections,” It is a bonus. 

“The board and recorder repeatedly flouted the law with respect to the November 2022 general elections, first by attempting to engage in an illegal hand count of ballots and then by the board violating its duty to canvass the election within the statutory timeframe.” 

“In both cases, the board and recorder ceased their unlawful conduct only after a court ordered them to do so.”

The Epoch Times asked Judd or Crosby to comment, but they didn’t respond.

“As a defendant in this lawsuit,” English informed The Epoch Times via email that “it would be inappropriate for me to comment at this time.”