A dispute over Republican Corporation Commission nominee Ralph Heap’s campaign signs escalated at an Arizona Citizens Clean Elections Commission meeting on August 4 when several Republicans urged consequences for Heap, with defeated incumbent Nick Myers voluntarily appearing during public comment and calling for the candidate who beat him to withdraw from the race.

Heap defeated Myers in the July Republican primary for one of two GOP Corporation Commission nominations. Myers has since publicly urged Republicans to “single-shot” incumbent Commissioner Kevin Thompson in November rather than cast their second vote for Heap.

Now, Myers is asking Heap to leave the race altogether.

The controversy stems from allegations that Heap’s campaign failed to properly report expenses associated with campaign signs displayed throughout the state.

West Valley Republican Lisa Everett, who questioned how Heap’s reported $644.47 expenditure for signs could account for the number she observed, filed the complaint. Everett later filed a separate complaint with the Arizona Secretary of State’s Office.

While simultaneously running her own campaign for the Dysart Unified School District Governing Board, Everett has also maintained an active social media effort urging Heap to withdraw from the race.

No one has determined that Heap violated Arizona campaign finance law.

During the Commission’s public-comment period, Myers identified himself as chairman of the Arizona Corporation Commission and “the immediate past candidate in this race.”

Myers argued that campaign signs are particularly important in down-ballot races such as the Corporation Commission because candidates often rely heavily on name recognition.

“An advantage of a thousand illegally funded signs isn’t insignificant,” Myers told commissioners. “In a race of this size, it’s substantial, and it’s likely decisive.”

Myers said that voters decided the primary by a narrow enough margin that he believed the result could have been different without the disputed signs.

He then directly called for the Republican nominee who defeated him to leave the race.

“I believe Mr. Heap should voluntarily withdraw from the race,” Myers said.

Myers went further, specifically raising the statutory process for replacing a candidate.

He told commissioners that if Heap withdrew “in a timely manner, so that the process established by statute to identify a replacement may be completed within the allotted time,” the Commission could consider that when deciding whether Heap deserved leniency.

“Leniency should only be considered if Mr. Heap does the right thing by voluntarily withdrawing from the race,” Myers said.

Myers also alleged that individuals behind the current situation may be the same people who approached him with a similar proposal four years ago.

“It’s widely believed that the individuals who advised this scheme are the same individuals who approached me four years ago with a substantially similar, if not identical, proposal,” Myers told commissioners.

Myers said he declined that alleged proposal because he believed it was unlawful.

He did not present direct evidence during his public comments establishing who purchased Heap’s signs or connecting the alleged conversation four years ago to Heap’s current campaign.  Notably, he didn’t produce a contemporaneous record that he complained about this proposal four years ago.

Myers was not alone in calling for consequences against Heap.

Former Republican Secretary of State candidate and former AZGOP chair Gina Swoboda also appeared during public comment Swoboda said she purchased 1,100 campaign signs during her own statewide race and recalled seeing Heap signs throughout Arizona.

Swoboda urged the Commission not to allow Heap to leave the Clean Elections program after winning the primary.

She went further, telling commissioners that if Heap refused to comply with applicable penalties, they should permit him to withdraw from the ballot completely.

Pinal County Republican Committee Second Vice Chair Nancy Hawkins also spoke against Heap, telling commissioners she saw dozens of his signs throughout Pinal County.

Hawkins suggested the Commission could consider waiving penalties if Heap voluntarily left the race.

Republican voter Vincent La called for the Commission to deny Heap’s request and pursue maximum consequences, including potential disqualification.

Tom Ryan also opposed Heap’s withdrawal from Clean Elections and argued the investigation should continue.

Tyler Montague told commissioners he could envision a scenario in which Heap acted without ill intent and instead received bad advice or was careless. But Montague nevertheless argued that Heap gained an unfair advantage and suggested withdrawal from the race could provide an appropriate resolution.  During his comments Montague disclosed that Dr. Heap had operated on both of his parents.

Much of the testimony presented at the hearing, as well as the original complaint, came from individuals who were active supporters of Nick Myers during the Republican primary.

Heap wasn’t present at the meeting. Attorney Timothy La Sota, who asked the Commission to approve Heap’s request to withdraw from the Clean Elections program, represented him.

La Sota disputed the characterization that Heap had received or fully qualified for public funding.

“We’ve not been provided any funding,” La Sota said. “We’ve been told that there’s at least some possibility we won’t ever get funding.”

According to the procedural history presented at the meeting, the Secretary of State’s Office notified Heap and Clean Elections staff on July 20 that Heap had submitted enough valid qualifying contributions to qualify for Clean Elections funding.

Clean Elections Executive Director Tom Collins said he subsequently sent La Sota a letter regarding Heap’s qualification and the withholding of funding under Commission rules.

Heap later requested to withdraw from the program.

La Sota argued that left Heap in an untenable position: he had not received Clean Elections money but, as a participating candidate, remained restricted from raising private campaign funds.

With early voting approaching, La Sota said Heap could not simply wait for the process to play out.

“There’s simply not time to kind of hang around and follow whatever process awaits us,” La Sota said.

He also characterized the allegations against Heap as relatively routine campaign issues.

“What Dr. Heap’s been accused of is sort of commonplace in campaigns,” La Sota said, describing it as a “garden variety accusation.”

La Sota also rejected suggestions that allowing Heap to leave Clean Elections would permit him to escape accountability.

Heap would still have to file campaign finance reports and could still face penalties for violations even if he were no longer a participating Clean Elections candidate, La Sota argued.

“You can still be penalized for violations of campaign finance laws,” he said.

After public commenters spent considerable time discussing Heap’s alleged misconduct, the effect of the signs on the primary and whether Heap should remain a candidate, the Commission’s independent legal adviser made clear that those issues were not what commissioners were called upon to decide.

Craig Morgan, the Commission’s independent legal adviser, told commissioners there was only one question before them.

“The sole issue before the commission today is whether to accept or deny the request from Dr. Heap, through his lawyer, to no longer participate as a clean candidate,” Morgan said.

He was even more explicit about the allegations that people raised during public comment.

“Issues related to sanctions, misconduct, alleged misconduct, investigations, complaints — none of that’s before you,” Morgan said. “None of that should be considered in any way, shape, or form, as it relates to the decision that you need to make today.”

The Commission could address those matters separately, Morgan said,  if and when they arose.

The Commission ultimately voted 4-0 to deny Heap’s request to withdraw from the Clean Elections program.

The underlying campaign finance allegations remain unresolved.

Myers and the other commenters have every right to raise concerns about potential campaign finance violations, and those allegations remain subject to investigation.

But the political sequence is difficult to overlook.

Republican voters chose Heap over Myers in the July primary. Myers declined to support the winner and subsequently encouraged Republicans to withhold their second Corporation Commission vote from Heap in November.

He then voluntarily appeared before the Clean Elections Commission, argued that Heap’s alleged conduct likely changed the outcome of the primary he lost, called for Heap to withdraw, and specifically pointed to the statutory process that would allow the selection of a replacement if Heap left the race in time.

Other public commenters similarly raised removal, disqualification or withdrawal, even as the Commission’s independent legal adviser reminded commissioners that alleged misconduct, sanctions and complaints were not actually before them that day.

The political consequences could extend beyond the primary dispute. Heap and Thompson will face Democrats Clara Pratte and Jonathon Hill for two Corporation Commission seats in November.

For Heap’s critics, the continuing effort is about election integrity and enforcement of Arizona’s campaign finance laws. But with the Republican primary already decided, the involvement of Myers and his supporters has ensured that questions about political motivation, and whether the fight is an attempt to revisit a result they opposed, will continue alongside the campaign finance investigation.

For now, Heap remains the Republican nominee, Myers remains the candidate he defeated, no one has determined that Heap violated Arizona campaign finance law.