This report documents the Heap v. Galvin, et al. litigation—a landmark legal battle over election authority in Maricopa County—and Supervisor Mark Stewart’s strategic maneuvering around the case. The court has ruled decisively in favor of County Recorder Justin Heap, finding that the Board of Supervisors illegally usurped election powers. Stewart’s response (mediation request, position flip-flopping) suggests political positioning rather than principled governance and raises questions about his relationship with the Board majority.
I. The Core Legal Dispute
Background: The 2024 Shared Services Agreement
In late 2024, outgoing Recorder Stephen Richer (defeated by Justin Heap in the GOP primary) negotiated a Shared Services Agreement (SSA) with the Board of Supervisors that transferred critical election functions from the Recorder’s Office to the Board:
| Function | 2023 SSA (Traditional) | 2024 SSA (Contested) |
|---|---|---|
| Early voting management | Recorder | Board |
| IT staff, servers, databases | Recorder | Board |
| Ballot drop boxes | Recorder | Board |
| Signature verification | Recorder | Recorder (reduced) |
| Election Director reports to | Recorder | Board |
Heap, who took office January 2025, rejected the 2024 SSA as unenforceable and filed suit on June 12, 2025.
II. Court Ruling: Heap v. Galvin, et al. (April 16, 2026)
Judge: Scott Blaney, Maricopa County Superior Court
Case: CV 2025-020621
Key Findings
- Board exceeded statutory authority – The Board cannot substitute itself for the Recorder without legislative authorization
- “Plenary authority” claim rejected – Board’s general supervisory powers do not override specific statutory delegations to other county officers
- Unlawful seizure of personnel/systems – Board’s removal of IT staff, servers, databases was illegal
- Weaponization of budget authority – Board cannot withhold $4.1M in state-appropriated election funds
Remedial Orders
- Return IT staff, servers, databases, software, websites to Recorder
- OR fund immediate replacement
- Restore early voting management to Recorder
- Board must fund “all necessary expenses” of Recorder’s election duties
Judge Blaney’s Warning on Disenfranchisement
“The Recorder’s inability to exercise meaningful control over election systems and staff will likely cause concrete operational harms, including inability to timely process provisional ballots under A.R.S. § 16-134, resulting in voters being denied tabulation of the full ballots they had voted and to which they were entitled.”
Source: AZ Free News, April 19, 2026; KJZZ, April 17, 2026
III. Board’s Response to Ruling
April 22, 2026 Board Meeting
Despite Recorder Heap urging the Board to accept the ruling and move forward, the Board voted 4-1 to:
- Seek automatic stay pending appeal
- Appeal the ruling if stay denied
The lone dissent: Supervisor Mark Stewart
Source: Arizona Globe, April 22, 2026
May 14, 2026: Stay Denied
Judge Blaney denied the Board’s motion to stay pending appeal, noting:
“The Court finds it inexplicable that the Board of Supervisors — in the nine months since Recorder Heap filed the present lawsuit — would not have considered and planned for the possibility that the Court would rule in favor of Recorder Heap.”
Source: AZ Free News, May 16, 2026
IV. Mark Stewart’s Position Evolution
Phase 1: The Lone Dissent (April 22, 2026)
Stewart voted NO on appealing the ruling—the only supervisor to do so. In his view, the court had provided clarity; the Board should accept it.
Phase 2: The Mediation Filing (May 4, 2026)
Stewart filed a separate legal request seeking court-ordered mediation:
- Requested “short-term stay to allow mediation”
- Wanted “court-appointed mediator” within two weeks
- Argued this was to “alleviate operational ambiguity”
But—Stewart amended his position to support the Board’s motion to stay, even while pursuing his own mediation track.
Stewart’s statement:
“Court ordered mediation is not about the appeal. Let’s use the time of the stay to negotiate operational challenges and accept the ruling.”
Source: AZ Free News, May 8, 2026; Arizona Daily Independent, May 4, 2026
Phase 3: Judge Skepticism
Judge Blaney commented on Stewart’s filing:
“While it appears that Supervisor Stewart filed his request in good faith, the Court has little confidence that parties will use this stay for good faith negotiation and will instead see it as an opportunity to moot the Court’s Ruling through extended delay.”
Source: AZ Free News, May 16, 2026
V. Analysis: What Stewart Is Actually Doing
The Strategic Problem
Stewart is attempting to thread a needle that may not exist:
- Voted against appealing (pro-Heap position)
- Now supports staying the ruling (pro-Board position)
- Wants mediation (appears reasonable/moderate)
- Claims to accept the ruling while delaying implementation
The Contradiction
If Stewart truly accepts the ruling, there’s no need for mediation—the court ordered specific actions. Mediation suggests there’s something to negotiate, which contradicts “accepting the ruling.”
Political Interpretation
As one political consultant told Arizona Daily Independent:
“Supervisor Stewart needs to decide whether he is for election integrity or not. Right now, he just looks like a guy who doesn’t know what he wants except to please no one.”
Stewart may be:
- Trying to distance himself from the unpopular Board appeal
- Positioning for re-election (District 1, term ends 2029)
- Protecting Chandler connections (former Vice Mayor, Councilmember)
- Attempting to appear moderate while Board majority takes heat
VI. Current Status (June 2026)
| Element | Status |
|---|---|
| Court ruling | Heap victorious; Board ordered to restore powers |
| Stay motion | DENIED (May 14) |
| Appeal | Board filed May 20, 2026 |
| Contempt motion | Heap filed May 28, 2026 (Board allegedly violating judgment) |
| Primary election | July 21, 2026 (approaching) |
| General election | November 4, 2026 |
Source: Democracy Docket case tracker
VII. Connections to Ongoing Investigation
Executive Session Agenda Items (June 8, 2026)
The Board’s June 8 Executive Meeting agenda includes three litigation items:
- Consult with attorney re: pending/contemplated litigation
- Possible direction to attorney
- Possible settlement
These are likely related to Heap v. Galvin and associated appeals.
Mark Stewart Profile Implications
From District-1-Mark-Stewart.md:
- “GameDay Men’s Health, Concept2Completion — hidden businesses”
- Pattern of opaque business dealings
- Now showing pattern of opaque political positioning
Question: Is Stewart’s mediation gambit genuinely about resolving the dispute, or about personal political preservation while the Board fights a losing legal battle?
VIII. Key Documents
| Document | Source | Date |
|---|---|---|
| April 16 Ruling | Democracy Docket | Apr 16, 2026 |
| Stewart Lone Dissent article | Arizona Globe | Apr 22, 2026 |
| Stewart Mediation Filing | Arizona Daily Independent | May 4, 2026 |
| Stay Denial Report | AZ Free News | May 16, 2026 |
| Mediation Analysis | The Center Square | May 8, 2026 |
| Guardian Coverage | The Guardian | Apr 17, 2026 |
IX. Recommendations for Follow-Up
- Monitor contempt motion (filed May 28) – Did Board comply with court order?
- Track appeal progress – When will Arizona Court of Appeals hear case?
- Watch Stewart’s voting record – Is he consistently splitting from Board majority?
- Public records request – Stewart’s emails re: mediation strategy
- Campaign finance – Any donations from election litigation stakeholders?
X. Assessment
Fact: The court ruled decisively in Heap’s favor. The Board’s appeal is legally weak and politically costly.
Inference: Mark Stewart is attempting to have it both ways—appearing reasonable while not actually breaking with the Board in any meaningful way.
Allegation: Stewart’s mediation request may be political theater designed to muddy the waters and delay implementation of a ruling he claims to accept.
Pattern: This fits Stewart’s established pattern of opacity (hidden business interests, unclear political positioning) and strategic ambiguity.
Report compiled from: Arizona Daily Independent, AZ Free News, Arizona Globe, The Center Square, KJZZ, The Guardian, Democracy Docket, official court records
