The ballots from the 2006 Regional Transportation Authority election will be destroyed, according to a ruling issued Tuesday by Pima County Superior Court Judge Charles Harrington.
The ballots must be destroyed according to state law since an election challenge wasn't filed within five days of the official canvass in 2006, Harrington wrote in his ruling.
The fate of the ballots became a question for the court when Pima County Treasurer Beth Ford told the local political parties she planned to destroy the ballots last summer. State law requires governments to keep ballots from federal elections for two years, and to keep ballots from local elections for six months. After those time limits run out, the ballots are to be destroyed.
Ford kept the ballots longer than the six months allowed because they were subject to ongoing public-records lawsuits and other legal challenges, she has said.
People are also reading…
The Pima County Democratic and Libertarian parties protested the destruction last July, saying the ballots needed to be kept to answer remaining questions about the validity of the 2006 transportation initiative, which also included a sales tax to fund the 20-year road plan.
Since that time, the Arizona Attorney General's Office has counted the ballots by hand as part of an investigation into fraud allegations in that election.
The hand count, performed by Maricopa County elections officials this spring, validated the ballot question's 60 percent approval.
Ford took a neutral position on the ballots' preservation or destruction, saying she just wanted a court ruling either way, said John Richardson, Ford's lawyer.
The Pima County Democratic Party argued the ballots must not be destroyed because elections can only be challenged during a five-day window after the election is officially canvassed, but it takes years to get records released, said Bill Risner, the party's attorney.
The ballots need to be kept long enough to allow an election challenge, Risner said, referring to a years-long civil court case to get elections databases released as public records and the subsequent time needed to analyze the databases.
"In a world of reality, how could we, or anyone, have challenged that election within five days? No one could," Risner said.
The Pima County Republican Party, which argued the ballots should be destroyed because the six-month retention period has long expired, said Risner's election challenge point has nothing to do with a court decision on the ballots' destruction.
"The ballots need to be disposed of or destroyed without opening the boxes or making copies," said Sean Brearcliffe, the Republican Party attorney.
In his ruling, Harrington also denied Brearcliffe's request to fine Risner $500 for not canceling a hearing months ago when Risner filed an appeal in the case. Six attorneys, the judge and the judge's staff prepared for the hearing and showed up for it, though it should have been canceled as soon as the appeal was filed, Brearcliffe said.
Even before the ruling, Risner said he planned to appeal so the five-day election challenge law could be addressed by a state appeals court.
Knowing Risner planned to appeal, Harrington said his Tuesday ruling doesn't take effect until Oct. 9.
The Democratic Party will request a stay of the ruling in Superior Court to prevent destruction of the ballots while an appeal is filed, Risner said Tuesday. The appeal will focus on previous rulings that the court has no jurisdiction in election cases after the five-day window, even if there's proof of fraud, Risner said.
