Pinal County Attorney Voyles Teams Up With Sheriff Candidate Steve Henry


Pinal County Attorney Lando Voyles Announces Joint Campaign With Current PCSO Chief Deputy Steve Henry


Over the past 7 years, Pinal County witnessed great and innovative changes in law enforcement. Those innovative changes finally fully effectuated with the election of Lando Voyles as the Pinal County Attorney. Those results came after Sheriff Paul Babeu and Lando Voyles ran and worked as the “Law and Order” team.

The partnership showed leadership, accountability and results. That partnership worked because of the strong team efforts between both the Pinal County Sheriff’s Office (PCSO) and the Pinal County

Attorney’s Office (PCAO). The leadership, accountability and results demonstrated itself in numerous ways. Sheriff Paul’s number one deputy and current candidate for Pinal County Sheriff, Chief Deputy Steve Henry, worked tirelessly behind the scenes to make this happen.


Steve Henry showed leadership in many ways that helped the efficiency of trial work at the Pinal County Attorney’s Office. Steve built significant relationships between the Pinal County Sheriff’s Office and outside local, state and federal agencies. Those strong relationships partnered with the hard work and dedication of Pinal County Attorney, Lando Voyles, and PCAO to let all local agencies know that their hard work pays off through the convictions obtained. These relationships also turned the Pinal County Attorney’s Office into a viable alternative to the Federal Government.

Steven Henry’s leadership skills helped him successfully initiate, develop, and implement a major organizational change towards a community policing and intelligence based policing culture. Voyles used this plan to implement a vertical style prosecution that set in place direct accountability for charging and handling cases, resulting in quicker charging to conviction times and a decrease to tax payers, per case.


Henry organized the Professional Standards Unit into an internal mechanism that develops policy, procedure, and operations and continues to professionalize and standardize PCSO employees in best practices and legal based operations. Those same standards allowed Voyles’ attorneys to enter the courtroom with confidence and increase conviction rates, ensuring that our Pinal families remain safe.

Through streamlining operations, Henry maintained responsible police work and exceptional law enforcement services, despite the ever shrinking budget environment. Throughout this same time, Voyles first year in office saved almost a quarter of a million dollars from the budget granted PCAO, during his first full year in office. The second full year Voyles remained under budget by over four hundred thirty thousand dollars. Despite this, the case load increased to an all-time high as a direct result of the responsible police work of PCSO and the dedication of PCAO, as they work together using state of the art techniques and equipment to identify criminal conduct.


Relationships and enforcement strategies resulted in PCSO stepping in front as a national leader in Border Security and Drug interdiction. PCSO, under the direction of Sheriff Paul and Steve Henry, cross-deputized the United States Border Patrol (USBP), authorizing them to arrest suspects the same way that a sheriff’s deputy arrests. That cross-deputizing authority provided USBP the ability to seek out cartel scouts hiding on mountain tops, both on and off of Indian Reservations. Voyles successfully prosecuted each cartel scout, even those arrested on the Indian Reservations, based on the argument that they were committing a conspiracy to commit a crime within Pinal County.

Finally, Henry tripled the amount of volunteers and linked PCSO with numerous community organizations. Henry partnered PCSO with law enforcement agencies in education, crime suppression efforts, and intelligence sharing efforts. This partnership opened new headway in the investigation of child crimes. Voyles used these partnerships in creating the family advocacy centers in Pinal County. Voyles’ and Henry’s efforts, using outside partnerships and intelligence sharing efforts, dropped child crimes investigations from an average of 6 months and 12 interviews, per child, down to one day and one interview, per child.

These combined efforts dramatically changed the direction of law enforcement in Pinal County. The strategies and team work combined to make leading changes that Pinal County cannot afford to roll back. For all of the above reasons, Steve Henry and Lando Voyles hereby announce their joint candidacy for the year 2016, as the new “Law and Order” team and ask Pinal County to “Keep Law and Order”.

Sheriff Paul Babeu said, “Working together has paid off with improved safety, justice for victims and real consequences for criminals. Lando Voyles and Steve Henry will continue this strong partnership to protect our Pinal families and prioritize our safety.”

Steve Henry also commented by saying, “While government is broken at so many levels, this law and order team produces real and positive results for our Pinal County citizens. The county’s population continues to grow, yet we’ve taken an 8% budget cut to our operations. We must work harder and more efficient to ensure we don’t compromise service, staff training or fail to purchase needed equipment that would harm public safety.”

County Attorney Voyles said, “The core function of our government is public safety and justice. While our budgets have been reduced, I’m proud that efficiencies within our operation have produced surplus funds returned to the county general fund.”


MBQF Poll: Joe Arpaio Has 50/50 Chance Of Re-Election

Also, Tested was School Bonds, Pot Convention and Education Tax

(Phoenix, AZ) — MBQF, a public affairs and consulting firm, announced results of a recent survey dealing with the nationally known, Sheriff Joe Arpaio, who could be facing his toughest re-election battle yet.  We also looked at several other current issues in Arizona, primarily within Maricopa County.

In the most recent automated telephonic survey of 559 high efficacy voters in Maricopa County, conducted on October 19, 2015, the survey calculates a 4.14% theoretical margin of error, plus or minus in percentage points, 95% of the time.

The survey asked several questions of voters.  The first was a basic re-elect question regarding Sheriff Joe Arpaio, “Looking ahead to next year’s election for Maricopa County Sheriff, do you think that Joe Arpaio should be re-elected, or do you think that it is time to give someone else a chance?”

Arpaio Re-Elect Question
Should be re-elected
Give someone else a chance

Party Breakdown

Should be re-elected
Give someone else a chance

The second question was phrased, “Recently, the Republican Party of Maricopa County has decided to oppose ALL 28 school district overrides and bond ballot initiatives come this November.  Arizona is one of the lowest ranked states in the United States when it comes to education.  Would you consider the Republican Party of Maricopa Counties stance on these bonds as obstructionist or as fiscal prudence?”

County GOP-No on all Education
Fiscal prudence
No opinion

The third question was phrased, “Given what you know about Arizona’s education system, would you be willing to pay slightly more generally in taxes to invest in Arizona’s Education System?”

Invest in Education System

The fourth question was phrased, “The Phoenix Convention center will be hosting the “Southwest Cannabis Conference & Expo” at the end of this month.  Do you think that is a good idea or bad idea to host this event?”

Pot Expo – Good/Bad?
Good idea to host event
Bad idea to host event
No opinion

Michael Noble, consultant and pollster, issued the following statement:

“With Maricopa County voters split on whether America’s Toughest Sheriff deserves another four years, the data shows Sheriff Joe will have his toughest campaign ever.  Republicans, Democrats, and Independents are near evenly split.  In addition, a small plurality of county voters say they are open to paying more for education.  With most eyes focused on the Presidential election next November, Arizona voters have some big choices.”

For more information about this survey, or a summary of topline data and wording, please contact MBQF Consulting. The margin of error for this survey is +/-4.14%.

Steve Henry Announces Campaign for Pinal County Sheriff

Steve Henry

Steve Henry Announces Campaign to Fill the Big Shoes of Sheriff Paul Babeu

(San Tan Valley, AZ) — Steve Henry, the Pinal County Sheriff Office Chief Deputy, announced today that he would be running to fill the impending open Sheriff’s position.

With the recent news that current Pinal County Sheriff Paul Babeu will be running for the open 1st Congressional District their will need to be a strong and capable person to fill those shoes.

Sheriff Paul Babeu stated, “Over the last 7 years we have accomplished so much here at the Pinal County Sheriff’s office and I could not have done it alone.  Chief Henry has been with me every step of the way as we have enforced the rule of law, raised the standards at PCSO and aggressively fought the drug cartels.”

Pinal County is a major pass through county in Arizona for drug smugglers due to Arizona’s natural landscape and given that Pinal County is larger than the state of Connecticut it faces many challenges to law enforcement.

“Providing fast response times in such a large County is an organizational challenge and whoever takes over for me when I leave needs to have the experience to get the job done,” Babeu said. “As I go off to take the fight in Congress for stronger border security and the rule of law I do not want to undue all the good we have done at PCSO since I was elected.  Chief Henry has my full support for his run for Sheriff and I could think of no one more qualified and able to continue to do all the good things we started on 7 years ago.”

Steve Henry stated, “Sheriff Paul Babeu is a friend and we have accomplished great things together.  I can think of no one else in Pinal County that has given so much back to the community and impacted peoples lives in such a positive way.  I have no doubt he will make a great Congressman, until then, I plan to continue the great work we have started.”

Steve Henry lives in San Tan Valley with wife Sally and two teenage children. One of his daughters is married to an active duty Marine and they live at Camp Pendleton.

Steve Henry has a long and distinguished career in Public service and law enforcement.  Prior to becoming the Chief Deputy of the Pinal County Sheriff’ Office in 2009 where he oversees a staff of 700 employees and volunteers with a budget of $44 million, Chief Henry served in various specialized and leadership positions in municipal and county law enforcement agencies including assignments in Patrol, Field Training, SWAT, Gang Enforcement, Internal Affairs, Community Services, Special assignments with the Bicycle Unit and Traffic Unit and recruiting unit. Chief Henry holds numerous certifications to include Hate and Bias Crime Investigations, General Instructor, Fire Arms Instructor, Court certified expert witness in Criminal Street Gangs, to name just a few. Chief Henry also served as an enlisted member and as an Officer in the United States Army, Chief Henry has the experience and training to meet the diverse challenges law enforcement faces in today’s society. Combining his Master Degree in Educational Leadership with specialized leadership training from the FBI National Academy and the Harvard University John F. Kennedy School of Government, Chief Henry is a force in bringing innovative and new programs forward that promote public safety.

Chief Henry is currently a Board Member of the Pinal County Drug Coalition, a Board Member for the Arizona Governors Office of Highway Safety DUI Commission, adjunct member of the Arizona Legislature Border Security Committee, past Vice-President and member of the Pinal County Law Enforcement Association and is a member of numerous other organizations. Chief Henry’s awards are too numerous to list but they include the Eagle Scout award, Police Medal of Honor, two Meritorious Service awards, and the Sheriffs Exceptional Leadership Award. 

Yuma County Sheriff Leon Wilmot: ‘Feds Refusing to Prosecute Illegals’

By Olaf Ekberg
(Reposted from The American Mirror)

Yuma County, Arizona Sheriff Leon Wilmot is tired of his county’s taxpayers paying to recapture illegal immigrants because of the federal government’s refusal to enforce the law.

“If you are not going to do your job and we have to do it for you, you should be paying us,” Wilmot tells KYMA.

leon-wilmotWilmot says his department has arrested illegal immigrants for drug smuggling and identity theft, but the U.S. District Attorney “fails to prosecute them.” The sheriff says the feds’ inaction is costing Yuma County taxpayers about a million dollars a year.

The Sheriff’s Office has made more than 150 arrests since last October, and 13 illegals in the last week alone for fake passports.

Wilmot says it has cost about $950,000 over the last year to house illegals in the county jail. That amount has increased to $980,000 and so far, there’s no word from the District Attorney about whether the feds will help cover the cost.

“They think it’s better served by the local authorities. Our point on that is you’re costing us an arm and a leg to do your job,” says Capt. Eben Bratcher, according to The Republic.

Illegal immigration prosecutions in Arizona were down 15% between July 2014 and July 2015, according to data compiled by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse at Syracuse University.

To Bratcher, that means more drug smugglers and immigrants who use false identification are getting off the hook too easily.

“We don’t believe that letting these people go is doing anything to protect our border,” he says.

Bratcher says local authorities have been charging illegals for crimes based on state statutes. “He gave the example of a man who was caught transporting 30 pounds of methamphetamine at a border crossing but whom federal prosecutors declined to pursue,” according to the paper.

Marc Rosenblum, deputy director of the U.S. Immigration Policy Program at the non-partisan Migration Policy Institute, says fewer arrests and less resources “could contribute to the decline in prosecutions.”

Who is responsible for raising your property taxes?


Dear Arizona Taxpayer:

Maricopa County Treasurer Hos Hoskins made headlines with the policy letter he included with recent property tax bills for Maricopa County residents.  (Note for those living outside of the “Great State of Maricopa”: this does apply to you, as well.)   Hoskins has re-opened an interesting policy debate about the extent to which property tax burdens have been shifted from business property taxpayers to residential property taxpayers (or vice-versa, depending on your point of view).  We have included some links below about that debate.

Setting aside the debate about the burden shift, Hoskins made a claim that is very counterproductive to the efforts of property taxpayers to fight for tax relief.   Multiple times in his letter, Hoskins made the following claim: “Voicing your opinion to anyone other than your legislators will change nothing.”

That claim is highly misleading.

Consider just a few examples from your property tax bill.  If you look closely, you will see several line-item levy amounts from several different local government taxing authorities: your K-12 school districts, your community college district, your city government, your county government, and multiple special taxing districts.  Each of those taxing districts have authority, completely independent of the state Legislature, to raise (or more rarely, lower) your property tax levy.

(Note: Always focus on the levy, which is the actual number of dollars you must pay, rather than the rate.  If local officials brag to you that they have lowered property tax rates, hold onto your wallet and ask them what is going to happen to your actual levy.)

Many Arizona school districts and municipalities have put budget override and bond measures on your November 3 ballot.  If passed by voters, those measures will increase your property tax bill.  Those measures were not placed on your ballot by the Arizona Legislature.  They are on your ballot, and driving up your tax bill, at the sole discretion of local elected officials.  Your school district board members are under no legal (or in our opinion, moral) obligation to try to push for an override.

For example, Phoenix Union school board members could have decided that spending $9,627 per student  (in current expenditures, not counting capital and other costs) is enough.  Even without the override, Phoenix Union will spend more than $9,000 per student – enough money to put two teachers in every classroom of 25 students and pay each of those teachers $75,000 per year.   Instead of trying to raise taxes via an override, the Phoenix Union board members could cut excess administration and other waste.  See our Phoenix Union flyer HERE, and contact us at if you want us to send you a flyer for your own school district.

We as citizens and taxpayers must hold the local officials in our cities, counties and school districts accountable for the dollars they choose to spend.  See AFP’s Local Government Scorecard to learn more about holding your local officials accountable.

Back to the interesting debate on the business-residential property tax levy shift…  For a defense of the shift and Proposition 117 (which passed in 2012), go here for the response of the Arizona Tax Research Association to the Hoskins letter.  Or go here for Senator Debbie Lesko’s response.

Boaz Witbeck
Arizona Policy Analyst
Americans for Prosperity

Say It Isn’t So, Joe

If this story is even partially true, Sheriff Joe Arpaio has finally jumped the shark.  Many conservatives around the state—and country—have held him up both as a hero in his law enforcement ardency and in his refusal to bow to the surrounding left-liberal commentariat and activists.  Over the past couple of years, he has made that job more difficult with some poor decisions, but now he is making it impossible.

Just last month he announced a new effort to go after street dealers of drugs, a la Giuliani and Bratton, including marijuana.  That is a good idea and did wonders for the Big Apple.  Knowing how problematic and crime-driving drug sales are, and how everything from marijuana to heroin is increasingly ending up in too many of our teens’ hands and brains, it is an even better idea for Arizona.   Now, however, he is a featured speaker at a fundraiser for a group supporting legalizing marijuana.  While the event seems to be billed as an educational event on how seniors can benefit from medical marijuana, the group sponsoring it is all over and all about legalizing recreational use as well, that is, legalizing marijuana.  And their promotional material seems to confuse those issues to boot.

People can have their opinions on this—we tend to side with the position that legalizing a product that more and more science is showing to be more and more potent is actually a bad idea.  We also note how marijuana legalization will actually be bad for law enforcement, generally, and how we can read by the week about new illegal grows and law enforcement seizures in places like Colorado and Washington where the black market is still thriving.  And we think it as close to horrific as can be that, yes, it’s still getting into the hands of our teens.

With all that said, just what is Sheriff Joe doing, and, moreover, what is he communicating?  We know from the Arizona Department of Health Services that “medical marijuana” is simply not something most seniors are interested in, with about five percent of such “card holders” being over the age of 71 (and the vast plurality of “card holders” being under forty).  Is the point to get more of them to use?  Is it to fundraise for legalization as the sponsoring group wants to do and issues reports on?

Sheriff Joe has had a long and noble career with both the DEA and the Maricopa County Sheriff’s office—he should not be, at once, putting the brakes and accelerator on an issue he has committed his life toward, all the while sending mixed signals to our community, and helping fundraise for the opposite of what his Department says it is doing.  If he’s being used as a dupe, he should stop.  If he’s caving in on an issue he’s dedicated his career to, that’s another matter—but he should tell us clearly so we can all know just what it is he is up to.  And, if he’s simply not sure anymore, and jumped the shark, then he should resign.

Huge breaking ethics scandal with Mary Rose Wilcox and APS

A m e r i c a n  P o s t – G a z e t t e

Distributed by C O M M O N S E N S E , in Arizona

Friday,  October 24th, 2014

APS sold Mary Rose Wilcox a plot of land for nearly $100,000 below market value

She rents it back to APS for at least $5,000 a year; didn’t disclose when voting on APS projects as county supervisor

Retrieved from

For the first time, we now know that APS gave Mary Rose Wilcox a shady, below-market land deal AND is paying her at least $5,000 a year for the right to rent back that property.

The Phoenix New Times reported yesterday that the land Mary Rose Wilcox bought from APS for $152,750 “should have gone for at least $675,000.”

But Wilcox never disclosed this business deal with APS while voting to give APS millions of dollars in county contracts. So what is Mary Rose Wilcox hiding?

But what is APS getting from Wilcox?

The Phoenix New Times reports: “Wilcox increased her net worth through land deals, with at least one in 2003 involving an acre purchased from Arizona Public Service for hundreds of thousands of dollars below market value. She didn’t disclose that transaction even as she voted as a county supervisor on APS-related projects.”

Mary Rose Wilcox bought a parking lot from APS for, according to the New Times, between 1/3rd and 1/5th of fair market value — and then rented the space back to APS for thousands of dollars a year.

Not a bad deal if you can get it, right?

When asked why she had received tens of thousands of dollars from APS without disclosing it, Mary Rose Wilcox’s only explanation was: “APS says, ‘We need to pay you.'”

Demand to know why APS is paying Mary Rose Wilcox.

Why is APS paying Mary Rose Wilcox while she votes on their projects such a big deal? This breaks it down pretty well:

“What is APS? The largest electric utility in Arizona and 27th largest coal energy producer in the United States has ownership interests in three huge coal-fired power plants: the Cholla Generating Station, the Four Corners Steam Plant, and the Navajo Generating Station. It’s a corporate funder of ALEC, the American Legislative Exchange Council, and sits on its energy, environment, and agriculture task force. APS is notorious for its attack on net metering solar energy, pouring $9 million – or $9 per ratepayer – into an effort to convince regulators that Arizona’s precious sunshine is so rare that solar panel owners must pay to access it.”

Mary Rose Wilcox drives a North Star SLS Cadillac with a “MRSROSE” vanity plate. But it should read: “APSPAYSME”

For more information, visit the Facebook page

Join Our Mailing List

Don’t Give Your Money to Another Government-Run Hospital – Vote NO on 480!

Friends and supporters,

We are pleased to announce the launch of the first NO on Proposition 480 TV ad today.

Proposition 480 would impose a $1.6 billion tax increase on Maricopa County property owners for a new government run, county hospital. Many believe that the price tag for what amounts to a blank check is too high for a special district with a relatively narrow mission.

Supporters of Prop 480 don’t want to talk about the price tag. Neither do they want to explain how they are spending $600,000 of taxpayer money to run a feel good branding campaign in conjunction with the referendum campaign.

If you agree that Prop 480 is a bad idea at a bad time, please forward this ad to your friends via e-mail, Facebook, Twitter or other social media outlets. Please help us get out the word that the price of Prop 480 is just too high.

Click below to view the ad, coming to a TV near you. Also please go to our website, for additional information.

Federal judge upholds $638,148 wrongful termination suit for Deputy County Attorney against county supervisors for whistleblowing

A m e r i c a n  P o s t – G a z e t t e

Distributed by C O M M O N S E N S E , in Arizona

Tuesday,  September 9th, 2014

Supervisors waste more taxpayer dollars appealing verdict against them for retaliating against whistleblowing Deputy County Attorney Maria Brandon

Maricopa County Supervisors will not stop abusing tax dollars in witchhunts against those exposing their corruption

MCBOS-Jail-Card1-1024x791 You don’t need to hear it from us, even the Phoenix New Times is reporting on this latest abuse. Here are some excerpts from their article today:

Maricopa County officials violated the rights of a former deputy county attorney by firing her after she spoke to a local newspaper, a federal judge confirms.

In an eight-page ruling last week that upholds February’s $638,148 jury verdict in the case, U.S District Judge Frederick Martone wrote that “more than sufficient evidence” proved lawyer Maria Brandon’s allegations that the county retaliated against her for talking to an Arizona Republic reporter in 2010.

The case stemmed from a brief, innocuous-sounding quote that Brandon gave to the Arizona Republic for a 2010 article by veteran scribes Craig Harris and Yvonne Wingett Sanchez. The article was about a lawsuit settlement with seven anti-Sheriff Joe Arpaio demonstrators who were arrested unfairly by the sheriff’s office in two 2008 incidents.

Brandon, acting as lawyer for the Sheriff’s Office, didn’t want to pay the protesters more than $7,500 each in a settlement deal. Unexpectedly, lawyers for the Board of Supervisors and Assistant Risk Manager Rocky Armfield had the payout bumped up to a total of nearly half a million bucks.
“I don’t know why they did what they did, and I’m sure they have their reasons,” Brandon told the Republic for the July 9, 2010, article.


Whether she realized it, or not, Brandon had stepped on a hornet’s nest. At the time, county administration officials were engaged in a serious feud with the Sheriff’s Office, which was acting unethically in a no-holds-barred attack on the Supervisors and county management that stemmed from a budget dispute. The feud culminated with the 2012 disbarment of former County Attorney Andy Thomas, Sheriff Joe Arpaio’s “unholy” ally.


Armfield and Deputy County Manager Sandi Wilson (who sued the county in June 2010, later receiving a $122,000 settlement) complained about Brandon to her employer. County Attorney’s Office supervisors then took the suggestion to strip Brandon of all of her risk-management cases. The move “all but eliminated her workload and undermined her reputation and standing” in the county attorney’s office, which ultimately led to her firing, Judge Martone wrote.

Evidence in the case revealed that Wilson and Armfield, in pressuring the County Attorney’s Office to do something about Brandon, overstepped their authority.

As we covered earlier this year, the County Attorney’s Office blamed Brandon for causing an altercation with paralegal Jackie Garcia — even though Garcia had made threats in front of other office employees to “kick [Brandon’s] ass.” Garcia was given a five-day unpaid suspension, while Brandon, a 31-year employee of the county, was fired.

Larry Cohen, Brandon’s lawyer, told the jury that discipline for the altercation with Garcia was the invented “pretext” for firing Brandon. Judge Martone seems to back up that contention in his new ruling — thus making Brandon’s supervisors at the CA’s Office look underhanded.


In an accompanying ruling last week, Martone also ordered the county to pay an additional $10,817 to Brandon for various court costs.


Read Judge Martone’s full ruling 


If the county supervisors attempt to appeal this to the Ninth Circuit, when are the grown-ups going to step up and stop this abuse of taxpayers’ dollars?

Join Our Mailing List

Corrupt Democrat supervisor Mary Rose Wilcox gets her $1 million from taxpayers for stress

A m e r i c a n  P o s t – G a z e t t e
Distributed by C O M M O N S E N S E , in Arizona
Monday June 2nd, 2014
Left wing 9th Circuit Court of Appeals affirms $975,000 settlement to corrupt Maricopa County Supervisor

Even the other county supervisors – who are mostly corrupt themselves – voted against her awarding herself money for “stress” over being prosecuted for filing false financial forms and voting on a grant to Chicanos por la Causa which was a conflict of interest considering they’d given her a loan at a great interest rate. 

UNBELIEVABLE……Read the story here. Must be nice to be powerful and connected. The rest of us little people would be in prison.
Join Our Mailing List