In a move aimed at tightening election security and restoring voter trust, the Mohave County Board of Supervisors voted unanimously on April 21 to approve a contract with Runbeck Election Services. The agreement will add new security features to ballots beginning with the 2026 midterm elections. While county officials praised the move as a proactive step, not everyone in Arizona’s election integrity community was convinced. Shelby Busch, a leading voice on election security issues, raised concerns about the partnership.

Busch is a well-known advocate for election integrity in Arizona Republican circles. She serves as the First Vice Chair of the Maricopa County Republican Committee (MCRC). She is the co-founder of We the People AZ Alliance, a political action committee that has actively challenged election procedures and results across the state. Busch has been a leading voice calling for greater transparency in elections, though her efforts have sometimes sparked controversy. Supporters see Busch as a tireless defender of election security.

The Arizona Globe wrote about the new Mohave contract on April 21, 2025. Under the new contract, ballots will incorporate enhancements such as watermarks, invisible fibers, infrared taggants, and UV-resistant paper. These features are designed to deter counterfeiting and ensure the authenticity of each ballot. The added security measures are expected to increase the cost by approximately 10 to 15 cents per ballot. With about 83,000 voters participating in the last midterm election, the total additional expense is projected to be between $8,300 and $12,450.

During the hearing, Supervisor Chairman Travis Lingenfelter emphasized the importance of the initiative, stating that the “investment is justified if it enhances voter trust”. He also expressed hope that other Arizona counties would adopt similar measures to standardize ballot security across the state.

Supervisor Sonny Borrelli defended the company’s reputation, describing Runbeck as “top rate” and capable of meeting the county’s security requirements.

Runbeck Election Services, based in Phoenix, has a longstanding history of providing election-related services and has been involved in printing ballots for various counties across the nation. The company drew the ire of many Arizonans in the election security arena.

Busch told the Globe that “there has been enough controversy surrounding Runbeck and the outsourcing of elections to third-party vendors”. She claimed that these vendors have, as shown by the courts, “lacked public oversight and accountability, and have demonstrated a disdain for transparency and public accountability”. She continued, “Considering all the difficulties we have had with Runbeck being transparent in regards to their operations in the past, encouraging additional contracts and use of Runbeck state wide is not wise to say the least.”  She concluded, “in fact it is potentially harmful to what we are fighting for and that is an open, honest and transparent election to the public.”

According to an election security expert, “they aren’t using fake ballots — they’re using fake voters on real ballots.” Busch argues that true election security requires complete transparency on ballot handling, including how many ballots are printed, how many are generated, how many are voted, and how many are spoiled. She points to Runbeck’s support for vote center models and print-on-demand systems as a major concern, warning that these practices make it harder to track ballot integrity. “We’ve been trying to obtain public records on how many ballots were printed during the 2024 election,” Busch said, “but those requests have been denied.”

Under Runbeck’s system, “there is no way to track the security of legitimate ballots,” says Busch. While discussions about watermarking ballots have gained traction as a way to prevent counterfeit ballots, Busch argues, “The real issue isn’t fake ballots entering the system — it’s the flood of legitimate ballots being voted illegitimately.” In her view, without strict controls and full transparency, the system remains vulnerable to manipulation.

Busch told the Globe that in Maricopa County alone, there were “over a million unreturned mail-in ballots in 2024.” She added, “Meanwhile, vote centers are cranking out ballots on demand for 28 days straight, with no real accountability for how many ballots are actually being printed.” Busch warned that without strict controls, the volume of unchecked ballots creates serious vulnerabilities in the election system.

During our interview, Busch reiterated, “The problem isn’t someone sitting in their basement printing fake ballots — there’s no need for that when you have companies like Runbeck printing millions of ballots and flooding them into the community.” She emphasized that the scale and lack of control over ballot distribution pose a far greater risk to election integrity.

Busch noted that she was aware former State Senator Sonny Borrelli had been pushing for watermarked ballots, saying, “I think it’s terrific — we should have watermarked ballots.” However, she cautioned that while watermarking is a step in the right direction, it won’t solve the deeper issues undermining election security. Busch also told the Globe that prior to our interview, she had not been informed of the Mohave County contract and was unaware that a deal with Runbeck was in the works.

Mohave County’s initiative places it among the first in Arizona to proactively enhance ballot security through such measures. While similar features are already in use in states like California, Georgia, and parts of Michigan, Arizona has not yet implemented a statewide mandate. Previous legislative efforts to require security markings on all ballots have been vetoed, with concerns about added complexity and expense cited as reasons.

The county’s decision sets a precedent for other jurisdictions considering similar steps to reinforce the integrity of the electoral process. However, Arizona should expect swift pushback from election security hawks.