Board Approves San Tan Valley Incorporation Election Canvass
The Pinal County Board of Supervisors unanimously approved the canvass of election results for the August 5, 2025, jurisdictional election on San Tan Valley incorporation during a special session meeting on August 18. The vote certifies the official results and allows the incorporation process to move forward to its next phase.
Proposition 495, which asked voters whether to incorporate San Tan Valley, passed with 10,133 votes in favor and 5,083 votes against. The approval of the canvass by Vice-Chairman Jeff McClure (presiding in Chairman Stephen Miller’s absence), Supervisors Jeff Serdy, Mike Goodman, and Rich Vitiello officially certifies the election results.
Voter Turnout Exceeds Expectations
Dana Lewis, Pinal County Recorder, reported that 15,221 ballots were cast from 55,081 registered active voters, achieving a 27.63% turnout rate. “27.63% turnout for an election such as an incorporation is actually a little bit better than we were expecting. We were expecting between 20 and 25%, so above 25% was pretty great,” Lewis told the board.
The turnout represented a significant increase from the CD7 special primary election held earlier this year. “As you’ll see from the previous CD7 special primary, we were only at 13%, so the jump up in numbers is very welcome,” Lewis noted.
Political party participation varied across the nonpartisan election. Among registered voters within each party, Democrats had the highest participation rate at 29.71%, followed by Republicans at 28.07%.
REP – Republican | DEM – Democrat | NOL – No Labels | L – Libertarian | PND – Party Not Designated (independent) | G – Green Party
Lewis also noted changes in voter registration patterns, specifically mentioning an increase in Green Party voters in Pinal County. She used the opportunity to provide voter education about participation trends in the San Tan Valley area.
Common Voter Questions and Ballot Processing
Lewis addressed several areas where voters frequently seek clarification, particularly regarding ballot processing methods. The election saw 69% of voters choose early voting options, either through mail-in ballots or in-person early voting. Election Day voting accounted for 12.1% of ballots cast.
A concern involved “late earlies” – voters who received early ballots but waited until Election Day to submit them. These ballots comprised 18.6% of all votes cast. “These are the people that, on Election Day, decided to drop their ballot either at a drop box or at the polls on Election Day, instead of getting it back to us so we could process in that early voting period,” Lewis explained. This timing creates additional work for election officials who must process these ballots alongside Election Day votes rather than during the designated early voting period when staff has more time for verification and processing. Lewis noted this as an ongoing challenge: “We will continue to see this, unfortunately.”
The county issued 37,096 early ballots by mail, with 13,334 ultimately accepted for counting. Of the 727 early ballots rejected, 65.5% were undeliverable by the postal service, 21.5% were marked as temporarily away from residence, and 13.1% lacked signatures.
Voter Error Factors in Vote Counting
Several human error factors affected ballot processing throughout the election from the 15,221 total ballots cast. Lewis detailed how these errors manifest and impact final counts.
Provisional Ballot Challenges
The election generated 119 provisional ballots – temporary ballots cast when a voter’s eligibility cannot be immediately verified at the polls – with 48 ultimately accepted and 71 rejected. Lewis clarified that none were conditional provisional ballots: “So we received, on election night, 119 provisional ballots. None of them were conditionals. Conditional provisional ballots means that somebody showed up to the polls on election day and failed to bring identification with them.”
Pinal County operates a precinct-based voting system rather than vote centers. Lewis explained: “Somebody is supposed to be voting at this voting location, they don’t understand that we are not vote centers, that we are precinct based, and able to make sure that we are able to reroute them to the appropriate voting location.”
Twenty of the 71 rejected provisional ballots came from voters who were out of boundary for the San Tan Valley incorporation area. Lewis described a common scenario: “People are seeing the signs, they then automatically show up, and then they realize that they’re out of precinct. We are never, ever going to tell somebody that they can’t vote. We will, however, have them cast a provisional ballot, and that provisional will not count if they are not eligible to vote in that election.”
Documentary Proof of Citizenship Requirements
Among the provisional ballot rejections, Documentary Proof of Citizenship (DPOC) requirements affected some voters. Twenty-two of the 39 that were listed as not registered were because of DPOC. “This is going to be one of those things that is a challenge in Arizona. Making sure people understand that we’re required to show documentary proof of citizenship in the state of Arizona to vote in these local elections,” Lewis said.
However, the county succeeded in helping some voters meet requirements on Election Day. “29 of the 48 that were accepted, this is a win for Pinal County, was because people were able to provide their DPOC by 7:00 PM on election night,” Lewis reported.
Processing Reconciliation Issues
Lewis also addressed ballot reconciliation discrepancies in two precincts. In Precinct 76, one ballot remained unaccounted for, with Lewis noting: “Two plausible scenarios for the one off. The ballot judge could have inadvertently provided an additional ballot, and that voter cast it. And we had one. Or there was a ballot outside of its provisional envelope. Again, these are processes. They are human processes. It’s never going to be 100%.”
Precinct 97 also had a reconciliation issue that election officials anticipated. “We knew that there were gonna be one off when they were doing their reconciliation at the end of the night, they did communicate with us, and we were able to identify that. A standard voter checked in. There was a provisional issue in the numbers number at the end because of that,” Lewis explained.
The county tracks these anomalies for training purposes. “We always track it so we can utilize it as training spaces,” Lewis explained.
Voter Record Maintenance
When ballots cannot be delivered, the county uses this information to update voter registration records. Lewis explained: “That voter will receive a letter saying, ‘Hey, we tried to get you a ballot. You did not return it.’ Or we learn ‘You don’t live there anymore, so we’re gonna start that process.’ That helps us maintain the voter rolls.”
When Vice-Chairman McClure questioned sending letters to addresses where ballots were already undeliverable, Lewis clarified the legal requirement: “I have to do two touches.” After both attempts fail, voters are moved to inactive status.
Incorporation Process Continues
The board’s approval allows the incorporation process to advance, but Lewis stressed the procedural importance of the canvass. “Without the official certification of an election, in a canvass, next steps cannot happen,” she told supervisors.
Potential challengers have until August 23 to contest the election results. If no challenges materialize, the Board of Supervisors will address incorporation next steps during their August 27 meeting.
The incorporation vote represents the first step in San Tan Valley’s potential transformation from an unincorporated community to an official municipality, with further administrative and legal processes required before incorporation becomes final.
