How Arizona’s election administration landscape has shifted

And what to know heading into this election cycle

Aug 12, 2024

Arizona is front of mind as we head into this election — just the words Maricopa County might cause a shiver up your spine. For the last few election cycles, Arizona has been a focal point of anti-democracy and election denialism activity.

But over the last few years, strong executive actors in the state — notably the Secretary of State and Attorney General — have stepped up to re-enforce the laws that safeguard elections in the state. This includes recent updates to the Election Procedures Manual (EPM) in 2023 that clarifies that full hand counts are illegal and that County Boards of Supervisors have no authority to delay certification.

Risk, however, still exists from bad faith actors who have been willing to blatantly violate settled election law — and we should anticipate the past efforts to be reduplicated. Which is why efforts to monitor elections are vital. We hope that our Arizona 2024 Election Administration report will provide the critical resources to our partners to help protect the integrity of Arizona’s elections.

In our Arizona report, you can find:

Details about each process step in the post-vote period, from tabulation through recounts and contests, to certification. This includes a timeline for each of these steps.
A rundown of the offices and officials who oversee the post-vote period, including boards, administrators, and the court.
A research library reviewing public officials who oversee election administration in Arizona, sortable by any concerning findings.
An analysis of potential vulnerabilities, including the in-state election denialism movement, delay tactics, and the four counties that pose the greatest risk.

See below for more details about the report. And for a summary of this report, please see our Key Findings one-pager.

As a public resource, we hope that you’ll take a moment to share this with colleagues or partners who might find these resources valuable:

If you're a reporter with questions about the upcoming elections in Arizona or want to schedule a briefing with your newsroom, please email Ryan Thomas at ryan@zpstrategies.com.

We are always open to your feedback, questions, and requests. Please share those notes with info@informingdemocracy.org.

Arizona 2024 Vote Counting and Certification Report: Highlights

Election administration in Arizona is fairly uniform across the state because election law has its foundations in detailed statutes and regulations — in the form of the Election Procedures Manual (EPM) which is a binding authority. Between these two sources there are very few open questions of law or other areas of local discretion. The most recent update to the EPM in 2023 includes important updates, including clarifying language that County Boards of Supervisors have no authority to delay certification.

Potential Vulnerabilities in Arizona

Arizona has a number of protections in place to safeguard its election processes from those seeking to undermine democracy and circumvent election results. The majority of election vulnerabilities in Arizona are not open questions of law, but rather driven by bad faith actors blatantly violating settled election law. The Secretary of State, Attorney General, and Arizona voters use the courts as one major forum to thwart bad actors. Notably, two Cochise County Supervisors face legal trouble for refusing to do their duty and certifying the 2022 elections by the legal deadline: their trial for felony interference with an election officer is scheduled for 2024.

Out of Arizona’s 15 counties, four pose major concerns with regard to free and fair election administration this November: Cochise, Mohave, Pinal, and Yavapai.

These counties are notable because they have county officials who have delayed or voted against certifying election results, advocated for hand counts of the election, had significant issues in past elections, and/or coordinated with local Oath Keeper groups.

The main concerns we identified in conducting a thorough review of the processes and personnel involved in administering the state’s elections include:

Election Denial: We reviewed election administration and found 24 of the 106 Arizona officials we researched had findings — representing 23% of officials.
Read more about their efforts in our Arizona Election Officials Findings.
Levers of Power: Given the strength and prevalence of the election denial movement in Arizona, we have also identified potential vulnerabilities that individuals wholly unconcerned with the rule of law could exploit.

In addition to certification, the Boards of Supervisors in each county also holds influential power over vote counting and election administration generally including appointing authority for members of the Central Counting Board and Precinct Election Board, where they could install anti-democratic actors.

County parties also play a key role in Arizona’s audit process. If county parties don’t appoint enough personnel, the audit is canceled. This sometimes happens for purely logistical reasons — an inability to recruit enough personnel, but could also be exploited by bad actors wishing to manipulate the processes.
Delay Tactics: Candidates who lost elections employed various delay tactics to attempt to prevent the finalization of election results. The most common tactic had been the use of the courts by well-funded litigants to draw out a legal challenge to the election. However, judges will eventually throw out meritless cases.

Counting and Certification Timeline

This report includes a timeline outlining the period for each step in post-vote election administration. These timelines are important because delay tactics have been a method used by aggrieved candidates to attempt to prevent the finalization of election results.

The timeline includes dates for:

Mail-In Ballot Processing
Hand Count Audits
Automatic Recount Orders
Tabulation
County Canvass
County Certification
And more…

Note: We will do our best to keep this timeline up-to-date throughout the election period, but we recommend verifying all dates in this calendar with official sources.

Election Official Research Database

We reviewed Arizona County Boards of Supervisors, County Sheriffs, County Recorders, and County Attorneys to identify officials with election roles who pose a concern to overseeing free and fair elections. Of these 106 officials, 24 had concerning findings — that represents 23% of officials in nine of Arizona’s 15 counties.

Our primary focus was the County Board of Supervisors, who play a large role in election administration. Of the 61 Supervisors whose news appearances, social media, and votes we reviewed, 14 had findings in their background that raised cause for concern — 23%. We also identified concerning findings on one of the 15 County Recorders and three of the 15 County Attorneys.

Among the top concerns from these election officials are:

Election Denial: Seven of the officials reviewed publicly denied or questioned the results of the 2020 election.
Election Subversion: 11 officials acted or expressed support for subverting the free and fair administration of elections.
Anti-Democratic Activity: A handful of Arizona officials’ past statements or actions raise concerns about anti-democracy activity or their willingness to follow the rule of law.

We also reviewed Arizona’s 15 County Sheriffs for evidence of election denialism or anti-democratic behavior and identified concerns with six. There is notable overlap between Arizona Sheriffs and election-deniers and anti-government extremist organizations.

We’re available for questions about this research and eager for your feedback, both on the research findings as well as presentation. Don’t hesitate to reach out.

Thank you,

The Informing Democracy Team