On July 9, 2026, the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors held two back-to-back meetings—first a Special Executive Session, then a Special Session—to address the ongoing legal crisis over election authority.
After 84 days of defying a court order, the Board met with outside counsel to discuss litigation strategy but took no public action and recessed the executive session for continuation the next day.
Meeting Details
| Special Session | Executive Session | |
|---|---|---|
| Date | Thursday, July 9, 2026 | Thursday, July 9, 2026 |
| Time | 9:00 AM | 9:00 AM (immediately preceding) |
| Duration | Brief (~20 minutes based on summary) | Duration not disclosed |
| Location | Sullivan Conference Room, 301 W Jefferson | Same |
| Chair | Kate Brophy McGee (District 3) | Same |
Attendance
| Supervisor | District | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Kate Brophy McGee | 3 | Present (Chair) |
| Debbie Lesko | 4 | Present (Vice Chair) |
| Mark Stewart | 1 | Present (Remote) |
| Thomas Galvin | 2 | Present (Remote) |
| Steve Gallardo | 5 | Arrived Late |
Note: Steve Gallardo missed the executive session vote, arriving after the Board had already entered executive session.
Critical Context: The Ongoing Crisis
This meeting occurs against the backdrop of an 84-day constitutional crisis (as of July 9):
- April 16, 2026: Judge Scott Blaney ruled the Board exceeded its authority and ordered return of election functions to Recorder Justin Heap
- May 29, 2026: Heap filed contempt motion after 43 days of non-compliance
- June 7, 2026: Board responded expressing “disappointment” that Heap went to court
- July 9, 2026: Board holds executive session with outside counsel to discuss litigation strategy
Primary Election: July 2026 (imminent)
Special Executive Session (9:00 AM)
Agenda Item 1: Election Authority Litigation
Statutory Authority:
- A.R.S. §38-431.03(A)(3) – Legal Advice
- A.R.S. §38-431.03(A)(4) – Litigation; Contract Negotiations; Settlement Discussions
Topic: Administration of Elections; Board Authority and Responsibilities; Litigation Update
Presenters:
- Kory Langhofer – Outside Counsel, Statecraft PLLC
- Zach Schira – Assistant County Manager
- Scott Jarrett – Director, Elections Department
Key Points:
- Board received confidential legal advice regarding ongoing litigation
- Discussion covered Board’s statutory authority vs. court-ordered limitations
- Outside counsel from Statecraft PLLC (not County Attorney’s office) leading strategy
Action: No public vote or decision—discussion only
Special Session (After Executive)
Vote 1: Enter Executive Session
Motion: To convene in Executive Session to consider items on the Executive Agenda
| Vote | Supervisor |
|---|---|
| Aye | Mark Stewart |
| Aye | Thomas Galvin |
| Aye | Kate Brophy McGee |
| Aye | Debbie Lesko |
| Absent | Steve Gallardo (arrived after vote) |
Result: Approved 4-0
Motion Made By: Debbie Lesko
Seconded By: Mark Stewart
Agenda Item 2: Possible Action on Election Authority
Description: Take possible action relating to Board’s Authority and Responsibilities in Administration of Elections
Contract Number: C-06-27-022-X-00
Result: NO ACTION TAKEN
The Board recessed from executive session, entered open session, and announced that the executive session would remain in recess and reconvene:
- When: Friday, July 10, 2026 at 8:55 AM
- Where: Same location (Sullivan Conference Room)
Pattern Analysis
The “No Action” Pattern
This continues a pattern where the Board:
- Holds executive sessions on controversial matters
- Emerges without taking substantive public votes
- Kicks decisions to future meetings
- Maintains status quo (continued defiance of court order)
Outside Counsel Strategy
The involvement of Kory Langhofer from Statecraft PLLC (outside counsel) rather than the County Attorney’s office suggests:
- Board seeking specialized election law expertise
- Potential disagreement with County Attorney’s advice
- Additional taxpayer expense for external legal representation
Gallardo’s Late Arrival
Steve Gallardo’s pattern of arriving late to controversial votes continues. He missed the executive session entry vote—the only vote taken.
Key Findings
- No Resolution: After 84 days of defying a court order, the Board took no action to resolve the impasse
- Continued Delay: Executive session left in recess, suggesting ongoing disagreement or strategic delay
- Outside Counsel Dependence: Board relying on private law firm rather than County Attorney for election authority questions
- Transparency Gap: Executive session prevents public understanding of Board’s legal strategy or rationale for continued non-compliance
- Imminent Election: With primary election approaching, election administration remains under cloud of legal uncertainty
Report compiled from official Maricopa County Board of Supervisors meeting documents. Public record.
