The Pima County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday voted unanimously to keep voter precincts the same for the 2022 election cycle, but were divided on their decision to ultimately eliminate Justice Precinct 5, and what it could mean for constables in Pima County.
Voter precincts
A proposal from the Pima County Elections Department originally recommended reducing the number of voter precincts in Pima County from 249 to 207 to “improve the efficiency of administering the election,” according to a board report.
According to the report, consolidating certain precincts – including four in the Green Valley and Sahuarita area – would save the county about $244,000 in the next election cycle.
The majority of supervisors, however, expressed doubts about the timing of the consolidation and its effect on voters.
Supervisor Rex Scott took issue with the formula the Elections Department used to justify the consolidation, which included data on the number of registered voters, early voters, and early votes counted in each precinct in 2020, but did not include Election Day voter turnout.
Scott also noted the heightened pressure that local and state political parties have put on in-person voting and the increased criticism that mail-in voting and the state’s early voter list has recently faced.
“I don’t think this is the time to be eliminating precincts. Until we see the effects of those measures...this is the wrong time to make this move,” Scott said.
Supervisor Steve Christy whose District 4 includes Green Valley and parts of Sahuarita, agreed, adding that consolidating precincts would mean more ballots coming into fewer voting locations, which could complicate the timely processing of election results.
“I think it shakes the confidence of an already shaken confidence level that voters have in the system. We should let the dust settle, let’s work this out, but I agree certainly that this is not the time for consolidation,” he said.
Christy also pointed out logistical errors with a proposed consolidation in District 4, which would combine Precinct 10, which is in Green Valley, with Precinct 84, which lies in the Town of Sahuarita.
“It would mean creating multiple ballots for the same precinct, and I think that’s one of the unintended consequences that needs to be ironed out and examined,” he said.
While the board did not approve precinct consolidation, County Administrator Chuck Huckelberry recommended the board consider redefining some precinct boundaries to ensure no individual properties are split by a precinct line.
Often, as is the case with one precinct boundary near Rancho Sahuarita, this confusion occurs when a subdivision is built after precinct lines have been established.
The Board of Supervisors is expected to review these minor changes during their next regular meeting Oct. 5.
JP5 eliminated
In a 4-1 vote, the board approved the redrawing of the county’s Justice Precincts in the Pima County Consolidated Justice Court, adopting a new map (Map Option 1) that effectively dissolves the current Justice Precinct 5 at the end of 2022.
Those in favor of the move cited the decline in cases and Judicial Productivity Credits (JPCs) the Pima County court system has seen over the past decade.
Paula Aboud, a former Pima County Justice of the Peace who helped develop the new judicial precinct map, recommended the board adopt the Option 1 Map because of its adherence to redistricting principles – allocating equal population in the precincts, maintaining geographic compactness and respecting communities of interest.
Supervisor Scott said this was a determining factor in his decision to approve the new map.
“The Board of Supervisors needs to demonstrate its belief in those principles – not just in the action we take today, but also the actions that we will take subsequently as we are looking at the redrawing of supervisorial boundaries,” he said.
Christy, who voted in opposition to the remapping, said eliminating a Judicial Precinct would contradict the growth he’s seen in the area.
“District 4 and JP5 have the largest population growth, and that is further evidence of the layer of law enforcement service that’s needed there by the Pima County Sheriff’s Department installing a new substation in Vail,” he said.
“The growth is there, the issues are there, the need is out there, and to suggest that Vail residents and the Southeast region residents can simply go to Green Valley to address court matters is unrealistic and burdensome.”
The current Justice Precinct 5, which encompasses much of eastern Pima County, will partially be absorbed into Justice Precinct 7, which serves Green Valley.
The change is expected to add about 30,000 more people to JP7.
Constables
During Tuesday’s meeting, the board accepted the resignation of Margaret Cummings, the constable for Justice Precinct 5, effective Sept. 25.
Because the board’s dissolution of JP5 will not take effect until the term of the current precinct’s judge, Judge Douglas Taylor Sr., expires in December 2022, the board was also tasked with filling the constable position for the next 15 months.
In a 4-1 vote, with Supervisor Matt Heinz opposed, the board approved a process to fill the vacancy within about 90 days.
Meanwhile, Huckelberry said his staff will work with the remaining constables to discuss the possibility of evenly distributing their workload.
“We’re in this very unique position of having a consolidated Justice Court and an unconsolidated constable, so that means some constables are significantly overworked, while some have little to do,” Huckelberry said.
“The whole process is really trying to get them to share the workload in a more cooperative manner than they have in the past, and our offer has been to have them try and consolidate their workload.”
Huckleberry said his staff will await a response from the constables about consolidation before taking action to fill the vacancy.
Heinz, the only opposing vote in proceeding with Cummings’ replacement, ultimately voiced his opposition to the presence of constables in Pima County altogether.
“I think we should hire professional staff that can be directed, and if they choose not to do it as we require, with regard to evictions and other things, they can be let go. We can’t do that with elected officials like this,” he said.
“It could save the county almost $2 million, and potentially a lot of headache going forward.”