State 48’s Friday Report: Breaking News Arizona Election Issues & Calls for DOJ Investigations
Yuma to Get Ballot Drop Box Cameras, Rep. Peña Probes Voter Suppression & Missing Evidence, Congressman Hamadeh Targets Runbeck—Plus: MCRC, Rachel Alexander, and Al Sharpton’s Group Join Forces?!
EXCLUSIVE: Ballot Cameras Coming to Yuma, But Rep. Peña’s Voter Suppression Probe Hit by Vanishing Records
Yuma County Recorder David Lara (R) told State 48 News he plans to install surveillance cameras at ballot drop boxes across the county, starting with the public library, and says he doesn’t need permission from the Board of Supervisors to do it.
“I do not have to go through anyone,” Lara said, citing the Arizona Election Procedures Manual to back his authority.“
He continued “I just need permission from the library to place the camera. This will be the first but I want to monitor all locations.”
Lara clarified that if the library had declined his request, then he would have taken the matter to the Board of Supervisors. But with approval from the library now in place, he says he’s moving forward. The cameras are already ordered and they will run via cellphone instead of WI-FI.
“It is important to do this because Yuma County is the problem child,” Lara told State 48 News. “We were the last to canvass, and we were the only county that was able to prove and get valid convictions and jail time for fraud. The confidence of the voter is my first priority.”
Lara’s push comes as concerns over election integrity remain high heading into the 2026 election cycle.
In a 16-page letter dated June 11, 2025, Deputy County Attorney Jessica L. Holzer—writing on behalf of Yuma County and obtained by State 48 News—appears to foreshadow potential resistance to Recorder Lara’s camera plan.
Holzer asserted, “Mr. Lara’s plan must still be approved by the Board of Supervisors,” directly contradicting what Lara told State 48 News.
The new Recorder said that he was also moved to act after Representative Michelle Pena (R-LD25) detailed a chain of events that led to potential evidence being destroyed.
On December 5, 2024, Arizona State Representative Michelle Peña submitted a public records request to then Yuma County Recorder Richard Colwell and Election Services Director Kika Guzman. While the request initially sought voting records, Peña made clear that her concern went far deeper.
Representative Pena also stated her desire to bring attention to "troublesome reports of voter suppression, intimidation, and harassment at the San Luis Library" that occurred in the form of "DJ's, loudspeakers and large groups of individuals chanting right outside the polling location." Representative Pena further stated that she personally witnessed, within the 75-foot electioneering boundary, a candidate "questioning and harassing a voter in line for having the opposing party's information."
Perhaps most striking: Peña said she saw an “an individual stuffing 4-6 ballots into the drop box at the San Luis Library." Pena also requested for the "video surveillance footage of the drop box."
Records obtained by State 48 News show the request was received and acknowledged by the proper Yuma officials in under 35 minutes—yet months went by without a response.
In her December 5 letter, Peña formally requested voting records from Yuma County. She cited Arizona law—A.R.S. §§ 39-121, 39-121.01, and 39-121.02. “The request was lawful, specific, and made in good faith,” Peña wrote. She emphasized it was submitted in her official capacity as a member of the Arizona House of Representatives.
But it wasn’t until after the lawmaker followed up that Yuma County finally responded on March 12, 2025, stating the requested records “no longer existed.”
“This response is deeply concerning,” Peña wrote to Yuma County, noting that her original request was well within the legal two-month retention window. “This appears to be a direct violation of Arizona’s public records retention and maintenance statutes,” she added in her letter to the County.
A series of letters were exchanged between Peña and Yuma County officials, with the County disputing the applicable retention period—arguing that the surveillance footage was maintained by the library in its ordinary course, not by the elections office. The back-and-forth also raised questions about jurisdiction: whether the Recorder or the Elections Director had authority over the matter.
Frankly, the situation grew increasingly convoluted, and we may detail those findings in a separate report.
Eventually, Representative John Gillette intervened in his official capacity. In a letter to Yuma County, Gillette suggested there may have been “an attempt to evade accountability and suppress key evidence.” As Chair of the House Committee on Federalism, Military Affairs, and Elections, he went further: “Based on what has been presented, the conduct of the Yuma County Elections Director could rise to the level of voter disenfranchisement.”
Gillette initially gave local officials time to “self-correct,” but after an unsuccessful Zoom meeting and a contentious 16-page letter from the Deputy County Attorney, the Chairman told State 48 News he is formally advancing the matter for criminal investigation.
We have contacted Yuma County officials and will report their response when received.
What do Al Sharpton and the Maricopa County Republican Committee have in common? Not much—except one surprising thing: both have found themselves on the same side of an issue few would have predicted.
They’re united in opposing the unchecked power of state bars to target attorneys.
Rachel Alexander, Arizona Sun Times journalist and a former Maricopa County prosecutor and outspoken conservative commentator, is accusing the State Bar of Arizona of disparate treatment. Her lawsuit underscores a growing national concern: that state bar associations are increasingly weaponizing disciplinary authority to silence political dissent—particularly among conservatives and minorities.
In a rare moment of accidental ideological alignment, figures as far apart as Al Sharpton and the Maricopa County GOP seem to agree on one core principle: attorneys shouldn’t be arbitrarily punished. The unusual coalition forming around this issue is as surprising as it is significant.
The National Action Network - Phoenix Metro wrote the following:
We therefore call for immediate and comprehensive oversight of the Arizona State Bar. Specifically, we demand a federal investigation into the Bar’s disciplinary practices by the U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, and Antitrust Division; independent audits of all disciplinary actions over the past ten years to determine the extent of racial, political, and viewpoint-based bias; legislative action by the Arizona Legislature to transfer disciplinary authority from the State Bar to an impartial, publicly accountable entity; restoration and expungement of disciplinary records where due process violations and retaliatory motives are evident; public hearings to allow affected attorneys and community members to testify to the harms caused by the current system; and formal censure or removal of any Bar personnel found to have engaged in unethical, retaliatory, or discriminatory conduct.
NAN- Phoenix Metro, detailed each lawyer’s circumstances and referred the matter for a federal investigation into the Bar’s disciplinary practices by the U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, and Antitrust Division.
The Maricopa County Republican Committee’s Executive Guidance Committee (MCRC EGC) just dropped a resolution demanding the DOJ step in and investigate the State Bar of Arizona. They say the Bar has been weaponized to punish attorneys with the “wrong” political views—namely conservatives.
In the resolution, the MCRC doesn’t hold back: “We believe there is sufficient evidence that the State Bar has violated the civil rights of certain attorneys based solely on their political beliefs, and we are requesting immediate action from the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice,” MCRC EGC said.
They’re asking for more than just an investigation—they want law licenses restored for people like former County Attorney Andrew Thomas and others caught up in what they describe as politically motivated disbarments and suspensions. They even threw in a request for “other relief” the DOJ sees fit.
Alexander is at the center of the storm but also sees the bigger picture. “This is about more than me,” she told her followers. “It’s about lawfare—plain and simple. Conservative lawyers are being targeted because of what they believe.”
When you have grassroots Republicans and Sharpton’s camp agreeing on anything, you know something’s off. And if this resolution gains traction, Arizona’s State Bar might be the next institution to face some accountability.
Republican State Senators Wendy Rogers (LD-7) and Mark Finchem (LD-1) have both issued letters calling for a civil rights investigation into the State Bar of Arizona.
In Alexander’s own words, the pressure mounting against the State Bar is no longer a fringe concern—it’s gaining serious momentum. Take a look:
Runbeck Election Services is back in the news. U.S. Congressman Abe Hamadeh (AZ-08) is fulfilling campaign promises by taking action on election security. He asked U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi to investigate claims that an election service provider may have seriously botched ballot handling during Arizona’s 2024 General Election.
In a letter sent Tuesday, Hamadeh pointed to reports that Runbeck, which processes ballots in Maricopa County, allegedly mixed blank ballots from multiple western states with live voted ballots inside a warehouse—raising big questions about chain of custody and ballot security.
“This alarming situation raises serious questions about the security and integrity of the election process in Maricopa County and potentially beyond,” Hamadeh wrote. “The comingling of blank ballots with live ballots poses a significant risk to the accuracy and fairness of election results.”
Hamadeh wants the Department of Justice to dig into:
How the ballots were mixed in the first place,
Whether proper security protocols were followed,
What impact (if any) the incident had on results in Maricopa County or elsewhere,
And any other factors that could’ve compromised the 2024 election.
His request comes just as FBI Director Kash Patel confirmed the bureau has handed over documents to Sen. Chuck Grassley about a Chinese effort to interfere in U.S. elections using fake mail-in ballots and counterfeit driver’s licenses—pointing to a bigger national concern Hamadeh says Arizona can’t ignore.
“We’ve known for years that our election processes in Arizona are flawed and ripe for nefarious activity,” Hamadeh stated. “Now is the time for DOJ to step in and make sure the integrity of our elections is fully restored.”
Journalist Jen Fifield with VoteBeat published Runbeck’s response to Hamadeh denying any wrongdoing:
We will update if this saga with Runbeck has legs.
ICYMI: One county wants to expand Runbeck’s relationship with Arizona Elections. You can read about that here and here.
Happy Weekend, Arizona
Also, you know what really chaps my hide? Maricopa County Superior Court Judge John Hannah Jr. denied Kari Lake access to ballot affidavit envelopes in her lawsuit regarding the 2022 Arizona gubernatorial election - because it would be SO dangerous to let people see them. )Never mind that Kari Lake could hire vetted auditors just like Election Departments has them.)
Now in the Raúl Grijalva replacement election, Pima County sends me the affidavit envelope with NO exterior envelope. I immediately looked out the window to see if Maricopa County Superior Court Judge John Hannah Jr. was driving by with a SWAT team on his way to arrest Pima County Recorder Gabriella Cázares-Kelly for this heinous crime but he is not to be seen.
Only Republicans are not allowed to see the ballot envelopes. I believe the Post Office will use their mail scans to identify Pima County Republican early ballot senders for some election fraud plan they have. At least they won't get mine because I put it inside my own exterior envelope and paid for the postage.