Just like the Pima County Democratic Party the night before, the Pima County Board of Supervisors wrestled for hours behind closed doors to decide what to do about Pima County Sheriff Chris Nanos.
Information discussed in executive session rarely becomes public, but the supervisors actively investigating the sheriff have set up a unique legal showdown — requiring the county to provide outside attorneys to represent supervisors in their fight with Nanos.
In fact, we spotted Deputy County Attorney Sam Brown waiting outside of the closed chambers because his office — which routinely represents both the supervisors and the sheriff — was conflicted out of the thorny discussion.
We saw this message a lot on Tuesday as the supervisors spent hours in executive session.
The Pima County Board of Supervisors huddled with lawyers for nearly five hours Tuesday, whittling down a list of questions that Nanos will soon have to answer under oath.
Those answers, expected within two weeks, could shape — or sink — his political future. It is unclear whether the 70-year-old sheriff plans on running for a third term in 2028.
Supervisors are leaning on a territorial-era law to compel Nanos to testify and have made clear they could remove him if he refuses.
Supervisors want to know more from Nanos — under oath — about his suspension of political rival Heather Lappin in 2024.
So what are the questions?
After the executive sessions, the supervisors agreed to ask Nanos questions related to:
Employment and disciplinary history: Nanos must confirm employment dates and departure circumstances from the El Paso Police Department. He will also be required to disclose any disciplinary history, including suspensions, and address any inaccuracies in prior statements.
Review of disciplinary processes: Nanos will have to disclose disciplinary actions involving former political rival Lt. Heather Lappin and one of her political allies, union leader Sgt. Aaron Cross. He will be asked to explain standards, procedures, and consistency safeguards to prevent perceived retaliation or uneven enforcement.
Coordination with federal immigration officials: The supervisors want details on communications with federal immigration officials since 2021 and whether they align with stated departmental policies.
Budget oversight: Nanos will have to defend his offices repeated budget overruns that have been flagged by the county’s finance department and outline how he plans to manage future budgets.
Nanos is required to answer these questions at the next board meeting, although he can choose to submit his answers in writing or appear in person.
We’ll note that the questions don’t touch other allegations into Nanos, including whether he properly handled an internal investigation into one of his deputies being sexually assaulted by a colleague at a holiday party.
In other words, the supervisors are pursuing areas where they likely have clearer jurisdiction, documentation and a legal pathway to act under the territorial-era statute. They are building a case they can win in court, not necessarily a case for political theater.
In other news from the supervisors, they signed off on the following on Tuesday:
A non-binding resolution opposing the recent executive order signed by President Donald Trump that would put significant limits on mail-in voting
A process to recruit and hire a new county administrator. The timeline and process will be posted on the county’s website in about a week, with the goal of having a new administrator in place by October — including a public process for residents to meet with the top three finalists before a decision is made.
A mask ordinance for law enforcement. The latest version will allow some officers to continue wearing masks if they display identification that clearly shows who they work for — so probably no more generic “police” patches.
We asked both Democrat Adelita Grijalva and Republican Juan Ciscomani — the two members of Congress representing Southern Arizona — on Tuesday morning to react to the ultimatum posted by President Donald Trump about the war in Iran.
A quick refresher: Trump warned "a whole civilization will die" in Iran if the leaders in Iran didn’t agree to his terms by Tuesday night, spurring a flurry of responses from both sides of the political spectrum. Several high-profile critics openly called for Trump’s cabinet to invoke the 25th Amendment, a serious attempt to remove him from office.
Shortly before the deadline, Trump announced a two-week break in hostilities — pulling the doomsday clock back a minute.
Here in Tucson, we didn’t hear back from the two-term Republican. Ciscomani’s social media channels were silent on the topic, instead focusing on his recent mine tour with Interior Secretary Doug Burgum.
His office did not respond to our request either, although last week they pointed us to an interview he did with KTAR in late March. In the interview, Ciscomani said he didn’t support troops on the ground, but said the Trump administration was accomplishing its military goals in Iran.
But this was weeks before Trump suggested he would order attacks to destroy all of Iran’s power plants and bridges.
Grijalva was far more direct, telling us she categorically opposes any additional (and the previous) strikes in Iran.
Her social media on Tuesday also responded directly to Trump’s ultimatum.
The freshman Democrat supports the wars power resolution introduced in the House that directed President Trump to stop the use of the U.S. military to attack Iran.
Hints of Minneapolis: An ICE agent pepper sprayed an observer in South Tucson on Monday, the Arizona Daily Star’s Emily Bregel reports. Steven Davis said he was recording agents in a Walgreens parking lot after observers followed ICE vehicles that were circling the neighborhood. Several observers reportedly stood in front of those vehicles to stop ICE agents from leaving and “kidnapping people.” One of the agents walked by Davis and sprayed him directly in the face.
“He didn't even break stride. No commands, no 'get back,' nothing. Just boom,” Davis said. “I was totally taken by surprise.”
Doubling down: Republican state lawmakers say Pima County officials broke the law by approving a policy that prevents federal immigration agents from working on county property without a judicial warrant, Gloria Rebecca Gomez reports for the Arizona Mirror. Senate leaders filed their complaint with Attorney General Kris Mayes and asked for an investigation. Senate President Warren Petersen said he’s seeing “Democrat-run local governments put radical political agendas ahead of public safety.” Their complaint comes a week after Republican Rep. Quang Nguyen asked Mayes to investigate the City of Tucson for a similar policy.
Blame the lawyers: Federal prosecutors asked a judge to dismiss criminal charges against Hernán Castro, known as the “mushroom man,” the Tucson Sentinel’s Paul Ingram reports. Castro is not out of the woods, though. He is now being held at an immigration detention center in Florence. The criminal charges were dismissed after it came to light that federal officials had destroyed the recording of an interview with Castro where he allegedly violated an obscure law about making a false certification while applying for citizenship. Castro also planned to testify that he was following the advice of his attorney, who made a legal error when she told him how to answer interview questions. (Steve Bannon used a similar argument to convince the U.S. Supreme Court to dismiss charges against him this week.)
Cracking the books: A Sierra Vista couple loves that school vouchers let them homeschool their kids, but they were “horrified” to see other parents misuse vouchers, Craig Harris reports for 12News. Chris and Heidi Moore, both Army veterans, say state officials need to put better controls on the program. The Moores say their kids are thriving with the academically rigorous, Catholic education (including sending get-well cards to the Pope) they’re getting with the help of vouchers. Meanwhile, Sierra Vista Unified School District families packed a town hall as district officials consider closing Joyce Clark Middle School due to a drop in enrollment and financial troubles, Alexis Ramanjulu reports for KGUN.
You can pack our virtual town hall to support local journalism by clicking this button.
Big fans of T-town: Tucson got another glowing review from the New York Times, which called Tucson “a city for outdoor lovers.” No, they weren’t talking about indecent acts at a park. They were referring to stargazing, saguaros and Mount Lemmon’s ponderosa pines.
Calling all voters!
We recently told you that the Agenda team is moderating the Arizona Citizens Clean Elections Commission’s 2026 legislative debates.
But we need your help.
We wanna hear your questions for candidates. All you have to do is fill out this quick form — it only takes a second.
And if your question is good, we’ll ask it.
The questions that are most helpful (and likely to get asked) are ones that illuminate who the candidates are as a person. And how they think about, and would vote on, specific policies that matter to you.
And remember: These are questions for the primary election, so we’re especially hunting for questions that will draw out the differences between members of the same party.
What we don’t need are gotcha questions or personal attacks. Don’t bother flooding our form with that junk.
Thanks!
Anthony Dunham, the GOP candidate for the state Senate seat in Legislative District 17, made headlines this week when the Republic revealed a history of what looks a lot like child abuse by one of his ex-wives.
Dunham was all set up to explain what happened with a video conference.
But he made a classic Zoom mistake:1 He didn’t turn on his mic.
1 We’re slightly suspicious that it wasn’t a mistake at all — that he in fact pulled a pro-grade con of pretending to take accountability while just singing into his muted mic. But that’s probably giving him too much credit.