Timeline Shows BOS Coordination with Left-Wing Push to Oust Maricopa County Recorder Justin Heap

Summary: Timeline reveals coordinated push with the radical left by the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors to oust Maricopa Recorder Justin Heap. Heap sues, arguing statute unconstitutional & limited to fiscal oversight per Sanchez v. Maricopa County. Court hearing February 26.

MARICOPA COUNTY – A clear chronological sequence reveals coordination between radical left advocacy groups, the Maricopa County Democratic Party, and the Board of Supervisors (BOS) in targeting elected Recorder Justin Heap. The effort began with a public resignation demand, escalated to formal removal proceedings under A.R.S. § 11-253, included explicit Democratic support on the day of the hearing, and culminated in the BOS refusing to close the case—leaving the threat of removal hanging indefinitely. Heap has now filed suit, with a show-cause hearing scheduled for February 26, 2026.

This follows Heap’s announcement—alongside DHS Secretary Kristi Noem—of identifying potential noncitizen voters on the rolls and implementing stronger signature verification to protect citizen-only elections, which EZCIVICS.org covered HERE.

February 2: Radical Left Group “All Voting is Local” Demands Immediate Resignation

The opening salvo came from All Voting is Local, a group that opposes voter ID requirements and noncitizen voter roll cleanups. Their press release accused Recorder Heap of refusing to condemn “violent political rhetoric” and claimed his actions disqualified him from office, demanding he resign immediately to “ensure Arizona’s elections remain free and fair.”

This set the public narrative weeks before any official BOS action.

February 10–11: BOS Adds Removal Proceedings to Agenda and Passes Motion

Just eight days later, the Board of Supervisors placed the matter on its agenda (February 10) and voted to initiate proceedings under A.R.S. § 11-253 on February 11. The statute allows the BOS to demand a sworn report from a county officer and, if unsatisfied, to remove that elected official for alleged “neglect of duty.”

Media outlets described the move as the “nuclear option” to force compliance or oust Heap—coming shortly after his election-integrity reforms gained national attention.

February 18: Maricopa County Democrats Send Letter Endorsing BOS Pressure and Potential Removal

On the very day of the special BOS hearing, the Maricopa County Democratic Party sent a letter to the supervisors praising their “continued efforts” to demand answers on budget and signature verification issues. The letter attacked Heap for “evasiveness,” “erratic behavior,” “conspiracy theories,” and “chicanery,” and urged the BOS to “compel” his compliance and to use “any legal measures necessary”—including removal—if he did not fully cooperate.

The Democrats explicitly framed the effort as necessary to protect elections “free of the chicanery that Mr. Heap has presided over.” This is a major shift in policy for the Democrats as they previously have repeated support for "protecting democracy" in opposition to overturning elections.

February 18 Special Meeting: Heap Testifies Under Oath—BOS Refuses to Close Proceedings

Recorder Heap appeared and provided detailed sworn testimony defending his office’s operations, the enhanced signature verification process, voter protections, and responses to prior BOS inquiries.

Supervisor Mark Stewart then moved to accept the report and formally close the A.R.S. § 11-253 proceedings, which would have eliminated the ongoing removal threat.

Supervisor Debbie Lesko declined to second the motion. Without a second, the motion died on the floor. The removal authority remains active, allowing the BOS to vote to oust Heap at any future meeting without restarting the process.

BOS Allies Claimed “No One Is Trying to Oust Heap”—Evidence Contradicts the Claim

As public criticism mounted, BOS-aligned figures insisted the proceedings were not about removal. Consultant Barrett Marson stated that “no one on the Board is trying to oust Heap” and suggested only Board critics were raising the issue.

However, the record shows otherwise: the agenda explicitly invoked A.R.S. § 11-253 removal powers, county communications referenced possible ouster, media headlines (sourced from BOS leaks) framed it as a vote to remove him, and even prominent GOP donors warned supervisors of severe 2028 political consequences for supporting removal.

Current Status: Recorder Heap Sues the BOS

—Argues A.R.S. § 11-253 Is Unconstitutional and Limited to Fiscal Oversight Only

—Show-Cause Hearing Set for February 26, 2026

Recorder Justin Heap has filed a lawsuit (Case No. CV2026-006822) directly challenging the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors' authority to initiate removal proceedings against him under A.R.S. § 11-253. In his complaint, Heap argues that the statute is unconstitutional as applied to elected constitutional county officers like the Recorder, and that even if constitutional, § 11-253 is narrowly limited to fiscal supervisory authority—not a broad power to remove elected officials over operational or policy disputes.

Heap relies heavily on the Arizona Supreme Court's recent decision in Sanchez v. Maricopa County, 572 P.3d 101 (Ariz. 2025). In Sanchez, the Court held that the Board of Supervisors' supervisory authority under A.R.S. § 11-251(1)—which § 11-253 elaborates—is confined to fiscal matters involving officers "charged with assessing, collecting, safekeeping, managing or disbursing the public revenues." The Court emphasized that this creates only fiscal oversight, not general supervisory or operational control over independent constitutional county officers. The Sanchez ruling stressed that such officers are independent and not subject to the Board's broad supervision beyond financial duties.

Applying this precedent, Heap contends § 11-253 cannot lawfully be used to demand sworn reports on non-fiscal matters (such as signature verification processes or election integrity reforms) or to threaten removal for alleged "neglect" in those areas. He argues the BOS's proceedings exceed their limited statutory and constitutional bounds.

Additionally, Heap asserts the removal effort violates the Arizona Constitution. Article XII, § 3 establishes four-year terms for county officers, to be filled by election, with the mandatory "shall hold office" language creating a strong presumption against removal except by explicit constitutional mechanisms like recall (Article VIII, Part 1). The Constitution does not delegate to the Legislature authority to create additional removal grounds for elected county officers in non-charter counties, and Article XIII, § 8 (on charters) does not extend such power here. Without express constitutional authorization, Heap argues, A.R.S. § 11-253 cannot override the voters' choice by allowing unelected supervisors to oust an elected officer.

The lawsuit seeks declaratory relief that the proceedings are invalid and unconstitutional, injunctive relief to halt or enjoin any further action under § 11-253, and other appropriate remedies to protect Heap's office and the voters' mandate.

The court has scheduled an "Order to Show Cause – Return Hearing" for Thursday, February 26, 2026, at 11:00 a.m., where the BOS defendants (Supervisors Kate Brophy McGee, Debbie Lesko, Thomas Galvin, Mark Stewart, and Steve Gallardo) must show cause why the proceedings should not be halted.

This case tests fundamental questions of separation of powers and voter sovereignty in Arizona: whether a Board of Supervisors can wield removal power over independently elected constitutional officers for non-fiscal reasons, contrary to Supreme Court precedent and constitutional structure. The February 26 hearing could determine if the coordinated pressure campaign—initiated by left-wing advocacy, amplified by partisan support, and advanced through BOS action—can survive legal scrutiny.

Arizona voters say they elected Heap to secure elections; the outcome will show whether that choice can be overturned without clear constitutional authority.

________

EZcivics.org is funded by our readers. If you found this news brief educational, consider chipping in to fuel our work by going HERE.