Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Elections Party Leadership topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Greenlee Democrats object to county election action; Board tables consent agenda item for review
Summary
Members of the Greenlee County Democratic committee told the Board of Supervisors they were unable to get the county elections director to reflect a recent change in party leadership. The board moved to remove and table the consent-agenda item for review with the county attorney.
Get email alerts on the Elections Party Leadership topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Erica Carrasco, treasurer of the Greenlee County Democrats, told the Board of Supervisors on June 24 that the county elections director would not reflect a change in the Democratic county leadership despite the party providing meeting minutes and other records.
Carrasco said the party attempted to rely on Arizona election law and internal party rulings to validate their changes, referencing ARS 16-8-822 (subsection e) and ARS 16-8-823(c) and noting a cited Arizona Supreme Court decision raised by party members. “We are willing to provide the minutes of this hearing and any minutes needed to reflect our actions and votes as the acting executive board,” Carrasco said.
The matter was raised during the call-to-the-public portion and then returned to the board later in the meeting as part of the consent agenda. After hearing Carrasco, a supervisor suggested pulling agenda item E from the consent agenda and tabling it until the board could review the matter with the county attorney and, if appropriate, consult the elections director when available. A motion to remove and table the consent-agenda item was seconded and approved by voice vote.
The board did not take action to change the county elections director’s record at the meeting. Supervisors emphasized the county’s limited authority over internal party governance while also saying the county would review the documentation presented by the Greenlee County Democrats.
The board’s action was procedural: the item was removed from the consent agenda and tabled for a future meeting so the county attorney and elections director could be consulted. No formal determination on the party’s internal dispute was made at the June 24 session.

