Recorder Raises Concerns Over Draft Rules
Pinal County Recorder Dana Lewis warned the Board of Supervisors on August 27 about problematic provisions in the state’s draft 2025 Elections Procedures Manual that could force changes to how the county conducts elections. “Under ARS 16-452, the elections procedure manual has the rule of law,” Lewis told the board during their regular meeting. The recorder sought board approval to submit public comments opposing certain provisions she believes exceed state authority.
History of Legal Disputes
Lewis referenced litigation between Pinal County and the Secretary of State’s office over similar issues in the previous election manual, which was ultimately invalidated by the Arizona Court of Appeals in March 2025 due to an inadequate public comment period. The county fought provisions requiring the loading of all ballot styles onto Accessible Voting Devices (AVDs) in ways that would fundamentally alter Pinal County’s election structure. The recorder specifically criticized what she called “overreach with it being then utilized as a piece of equipment that could take us from a precinct-based voting setup in Pinal County to turning us into vote centers.”
Current Manual Contains Same Disputed Language
Lewis informed the board that the current draft Elections Procedures Manual includes the same AVD provisions that sparked the previous litigation. The public comment period for the 2025 manual closed at 5:00 p.m. on August 31, ahead of the October 1 deadline for submitting the final version to the Attorney General and Governor. “The current EPM is out for public comment. That provision is back in the EPM, and after coming out of the litigation with that, it was advised to us that if we saw it again, we needed to bring it forward again,” Lewis explained to the supervisors.
Legal Counsel Engaged Again
The recorder’s office has re-engaged Snell & Wilmer, the law firm that represented Pinal County in the previous litigation against the Secretary of State’s office. Lewis expressed concerns about multiple provisions in the draft manual. “There’s additional provisions in the EPM that we feel are not aligned with the Arizona revised statutes, and if we don’t bring it forth now, it will implicate issues with the AVDs, precinct-based voting, just even how we do ballot layout,” Lewis stated.
Board Approves Action
Vice-Chairman Jeff McClure motioned to approve the recorder’s request, with Supervisor Rich Vitiello providing the second. Lewis emphasized the importance of acting now: “wanting to make sure that even though comments have been submitted to the Arizona Secretary of State’s office from our team, in the event that they don’t make it to the final provision that is presented by October 1st to the Attorney General’s office and the Governor’s office, that our piece was heard.”
The board’s approval allows Lewis to formalize Pinal County’s opposition to the disputed provisions before the Secretary of State finalizes the 2025 Elections Procedures Manual. With the October 1 deadline approaching for transmittal to the Attorney General and Governor, the county is positioning itself to challenge rules it believes could fundamentally alter its election operations.
Background: The Legal Battle Over Pinal County’s Election Rules
The disputes Lewis referenced stem from a complex legal battle that began in 2023 and continues today. The following timeline and definitions provide context for understanding how Pinal County’s current concerns about the 2025 Elections Procedures Manual connect to previous litigation over similar provisions.
Definitions for the Timeline
- EPM (Elections Procedures Manual): Arizona’s statewide rulebook for running elections, drafted by the Secretary of State and sent by Oct. 1 to the Attorney General and Governor under A.R.S. § 16-452; once approved, it has the force of law. The 2023 EPM’s draft was posted for only 15 days of public comment (instead of the required 30), which later led a court to invalidate it in 2025.
- APA (Arizona Administrative Procedure Act): Arizona’s rulemaking law that, among other things, requires at least 30 days of public comment for proposed rules/manuals.
- AVD (Accessible Voting Device): An ADA-compliant touchscreen/ballot-marking machine available at polling places.
- “All ballot styles” (on an AVD): Configuring the AVD to contain every precinct’s ballot, so a voter who arrives at the wrong precinct can still receive the correct ballot on that machine.
- Vote center vs. precinct-based:
- Vote center: Any county voter can vote at any vote-center location.
- Precinct-based: Each voter is assigned one polling place based on their address.
- Voter record error (Richer case): A database issue made it appear some voters had provided proof of citizenship, so systems treated them as eligible to vote in all races, even though the supporting records were unclear.
- Purcell principle: Courts generally avoid changing election rules close to an election because late changes can confuse voters and disrupt election administration; it’s a presumption, not an absolute rule, and comes from the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2006 decision in Purcell v. Gonzalez.
Timeline: Legal Fights Over Arizona’s Elections Procedures Manual in Pinal County
The timeline illustrates a recurring pattern: election rule disputes that begin with technical disagreements over voting equipment often escalate into broader questions about county autonomy and state authority. With the 2025 Elections Procedures Manual now heading toward final approval, Pinal County finds itself once again challenging provisions it believes exceed the Secretary of State’s regulatory authority
