Maricopa County supervisors unanimously certify Goldfield Fire District election after staff report

Maricopa County Board of Supervisors Chair Brophy McGee on June 1, 2026, presided over a special meeting to canvass the returns of the May 19 Goldfield Ranch (transcript also references “Goldfield Branch”) Fire District reorganization election; after a presentation by county elections staff, the board voted unanimously to approve the canvas.

Elections Director Scott Jarrett told the board the fire district asked voters whether to expand its governing board from three members to five and, separately, to elect members to fill those seats; the measure passed. Jarrett said the district has 274 registered voters and 95 returned ballots, “just shy of 35% turnout.” He reported there were no provisional ballots, no ballots rejected for bad signature, and no ballots returned after the 7 p.m. election-day cutoff; signatures were verified by the recorder’s office and the verified ballots were tabulated by the elections department.

The presentation prompted questions from supervisors about a separate review of voter registrations. Supervisor Gallardo asked whether any names that the recorder had submitted to the attorney general’s office as potentially ineligible were in this jurisdiction or otherwise had an opportunity to vote in the May 19 election; she said the names had been under review in recent weeks and that the timing of submission raised the possibility some individuals could have voted. "Do we know if any of those names... would have had an opportunity to participate in this election?" Gallardo asked.

Jarrett said he "had not been provided that list of names" and could not answer specifics without seeing it. He and Assistant County Manager Zach Shira explained that eligibility for local contests depends on documented proof of citizenship: registrants classified as federal-only because they have not provided that documentation would not be eligible to vote in local contests unless they later supplied proof. Jarrett and Shira told the board they could only confirm whether particular registrants were eligible after reviewing the records identified in the recorder’s review.

A board member asked Jarrett to clarify the board’s role in elections after a radio broadcast claimed the board had no role; Jarrett replied the board “has a substantial role in running elections,” including the duty to certify results in the form of a canvas, which was the action before the supervisors. The board then took a motion to approve the canvass; Vice Chair Leco moved to approve item number one, a motion was seconded, the clerk called the roll, and all five supervisors voted in favor. The clerk recorded five “I’s.”

With no further business, Chair Brophy McGee thanked members and declared the special meeting adjourned.

The board’s formal action was a certification of the canvass. Questions about the recorder’s separate review of potentially ineligible registrants remained unresolved in the meeting; county staff said they needed the specific list to determine whether any identified registrants had been eligible to vote in the May 19 contest.