Arizona · 2026 election coverage

Gila County

2026 election results and ballot analysis for the county's share of state and federal contests. Explore local offices, propositions and the communities within Gila County.

69% counted

An estimate, from the county's progress in the governor's race. How Arizona's count runs.

State and federal coverage. This page includes the county's portion of the statewide results. Local county offices, municipal contests, school boards and special districts may be missing. See the county's official results for that coverage.

Results file posted Nov 5, 5:26 PM. Source checked Nov 5, 5:30 PM.

Covered contests: 24
Propositions with yes/no returns: 8
Incorporated cities & towns: 6

Observed returns, unofficial until certified. “Ahead” describes the current count; it is not a local race call. Candidate selections in multi-seat contests are not ballots. Precinct reporting does not establish how many ballots remain.

Reading the county count

The governor's race

16,801 valid candidate selections are reported for governor in this county observation. Andy Biggs / Sine Kerr ahead by 3,755 votes (22.3 points).

This is a county portion of a statewide contest. A county lead is not a statewide election outcome.

Where the count is close

Corporation Commissioner: 4,068 votes between the current last seat position and the next candidate.

The smallest verifiable seat-boundary gap among covered candidate contests with a known seat count. A gap is withheld if unassigned write-ins could change its ranking. District races show this county's portion.

Among the 8 covered propositions with yes/no choices, Yes is ahead in 8 and No in 0. Ties and unreported counts remain unresolved. These are observed leads, not declarations that a measure passed or failed.

Ballot & results

All named candidates and reported write-in groups are retained. Shares use valid candidate selections for that contest, excluding overvotes and undervotes. A multi-seat share is not the percentage of voters supporting a candidate.

Federal & state

Attorney General

Attorney General: reported votes and shares
Candidate	Votes	Share
Warren Petersen R	10,412	62.5%
Kris Mayes D	6,232	37.4%
Unassigned Write-in	10	0.1%
Unofficial Write-in	0	0.0%

16,654 valid selections. 0 of 39 precincts reporting.

Warren Petersen ahead by 4,180 votes (25.1 points).

Statewide forecast: Mayes >99%. This is the county's share of a bigger contest.

Corporation Commissioner vote for 2

Corporation Commissioner: reported votes and shares
Candidate	Votes	Share
Kevin Thompson R	10,080	32.8%
Ralph Heap R	9,463	30.8%
Clara Pratte D	5,395	17.6%
Jonathon Hill D	5,293	17.2%
Mike Cease G	445	1.5%
Unassigned Write-in	12	0.0%
Unofficial Write-in	0	0.0%

30,688 valid selections. 0 of 39 precincts reporting.

4,068 votes between the current last seat position and the next candidate.

Statewide forecast: Pratte >99%, Hill 98%. This is the county's share of a bigger contest.

Governor and Lieutenant Governor

Governor and Lieutenant Governor: reported votes and shares
Candidate	Votes	Share
Andy Biggs / Sine Kerr R	10,108	60.2%
Katie Hobbs / John Giles D	6,353	37.8%
Teri Ann Hourihan / Angela Harrolle Mohan N	188	1.1%
Risa Lombardo / Lisa Castillo G	147	0.9%
Unassigned Write-in	5	0.0%
Alice Novoa R	0	0.0%
Gertritrude Gonzalez R	0	0.0%
Unofficial Write-in	0	0.0%

16,801 valid selections. 0 of 39 precincts reporting.

Andy Biggs / Sine Kerr ahead by 3,755 votes (22.3 points).

Called statewide: Hobbs. This is the county's share of a bigger contest.

Secretary of State

Secretary of State: reported votes and shares
Candidate	Votes	Share
Alexander Kolodin R	10,288	61.6%
Adrian Fontes D	6,151	36.8%
Duwayne Collier G	254	1.5%
Unassigned Write-in	5	0.0%
Unofficial Write-in	0	0.0%

16,698 valid selections. 0 of 39 precincts reporting.

Alexander Kolodin ahead by 4,137 votes (24.8 points).

Statewide forecast: Fontes >99%. This is the county's share of a bigger contest.

State Mine Inspector

State Mine Inspector: reported votes and shares
Candidate	Votes	Share
Walter "Les" Presmyk R	10,603	64.3%
Brian Matlock D	5,869	35.6%
Unassigned Write-in	25	0.2%
Unofficial Write-in	0	0.0%

16,497 valid selections. 0 of 39 precincts reporting.

Walter "Les" Presmyk ahead by 4,734 votes (28.7 points).

Statewide forecast: Matlock 97%. This is the county's share of a bigger contest.

State Representative - District No. 6 vote for 2

State Representative - District No. 6: reported votes and shares
Candidate	Votes	Share
Mae Peshlakai D	826	53.9%
Ian Teller D	623	40.7%
Brendan Trachsel G	71	4.6%
Unassigned Write-in	12	0.8%
Royce "Rj" Mark Jenkins R	0	0.0%
Unofficial Write-in	0	0.0%

1,532 valid selections. 0 of 3 precincts reporting.

552 votes between the current last seat position and the next candidate.

Statewide forecast: Peshlakai >99%, Teller >99%. This is the county's share of a bigger contest.

State Representative - District No. 7 vote for 2

State Representative - District No. 7: reported votes and shares
Candidate	Votes	Share
Walter "Walt" Blackman R	10,137	38.6%
David Cook Sr. R	9,514	36.2%
Samuel "Sam" Martin D	4,781	18.2%
Richard Grayson G	1,840	7.0%
Unassigned Write-in	23	0.1%
Unofficial Write-in	0	0.0%

26,295 valid selections. 0 of 36 precincts reporting.

4,733 votes between the current last seat position and the next candidate.

Statewide forecast: Blackman >99%, Cook >99%. This is the county's share of a bigger contest.

State Senator - District No. 6

State Senator - District No. 6: reported votes and shares
Candidate	Votes	Share
Jamescita Peshlakai D	957	87.8%
Lloyd Johnson R	131	12.0%
Unassigned Write-in	2	0.2%
Unofficial Write-in	0	0.0%

1,090 valid selections. 0 of 3 precincts reporting.

Jamescita Peshlakai ahead by 826 votes (75.8 points).

Statewide forecast: Peshlakai >99%. This is the county's share of a bigger contest.

State Senator - District No. 7

State Senator - District No. 7: reported votes and shares
Candidate	Votes	Share
Wendy Rogers R	10,551	67.6%
Michiel "Mike" Montiel D	5,032	32.3%
Unassigned Write-in	16	0.1%
Unofficial Write-in	0	0.0%

15,599 valid selections. 0 of 36 precincts reporting.

Wendy Rogers ahead by 5,519 votes (35.4 points).

Statewide forecast: Rogers >99%. This is the county's share of a bigger contest.

State Treasurer

State Treasurer: reported votes and shares
Candidate	Votes	Share
Elijah Norton R	10,696	64.6%
Nick Mansour D	5,853	35.3%
Unassigned Write-in	19	0.1%
Unofficial Write-in	0	0.0%

16,568 valid selections. 0 of 39 precincts reporting.

Elijah Norton ahead by 4,843 votes (29.2 points).

Statewide forecast: Mansour >99%. This is the county's share of a bigger contest.

Superintendent of Public Instruction

Superintendent of Public Instruction: reported votes and shares
Candidate	Votes	Share
Kimberly Yee R	10,786	64.8%
Teresa Leyba Ruiz D	5,827	35.0%
Unassigned Write-in	22	0.1%
Gerard Davis G	0	0.0%
Stephen Neal Jr. N	0	0.0%
Unofficial Write-in	0	0.0%

16,635 valid selections. 0 of 39 precincts reporting.

Kimberly Yee ahead by 4,959 votes (29.8 points).

Statewide forecast: Ruiz 98%. This is the county's share of a bigger contest.

U.S. Representative in Congress - District No. 2

U.S. Representative in Congress - District No. 2: reported votes and shares
Candidate	Votes	Share
Eli Crane R	10,418	62.2%
Jonathan Nez D	6,016	35.9%
Curtis Goodwin L	315	1.9%
Unassigned Write-in	11	0.1%
Unofficial Write-in	0	0.0%

16,760 valid selections. 0 of 39 precincts reporting.

Eli Crane ahead by 4,402 votes (26.3 points).

Statewide forecast: Crane 94%. This is the county's share of a bigger contest.

Propositions

PROPOSITION 141

PROPOSITION 141: reported votes and shares
Choice	Votes	Share
Yes	10,002	62.0%
No	6,135	38.0%

16,137 valid selections. 0 of 39 precincts reporting.

Yes ahead by 3,867 votes (24.0 points).

Statewide forecast: Yes 83%. This is the county's share of a bigger contest.

PROPOSITION 142

PROPOSITION 142: reported votes and shares
Choice	Votes	Share
Yes	8,393	51.7%
No	7,844	48.3%

16,237 valid selections. 0 of 39 precincts reporting.

Yes ahead by 549 votes (3.4 points).

Statewide forecast: No >99%. This is the county's share of a bigger contest.

PROPOSITION 144

PROPOSITION 144: reported votes and shares
Choice	Votes	Share
Yes	10,423	63.3%
No	6,042	36.7%

16,465 valid selections. 0 of 39 precincts reporting.

Yes ahead by 4,381 votes (26.6 points).

Statewide forecast: No >99%. This is the county's share of a bigger contest.

PROPOSITION 316

PROPOSITION 316: reported votes and shares
Choice	Votes	Share
Yes	12,030	73.4%
No	4,361	26.6%

16,391 valid selections. 0 of 39 precincts reporting.

Yes ahead by 7,669 votes (46.8 points).

Statewide forecast: Yes >99%. This is the county's share of a bigger contest.

PROPOSITION 317

PROPOSITION 317: reported votes and shares
Choice	Votes	Share
Yes	12,140	74.1%
No	4,248	25.9%

16,388 valid selections. 0 of 39 precincts reporting.

Yes ahead by 7,892 votes (48.2 points).

Statewide forecast: Yes >99%. This is the county's share of a bigger contest.

PROPOSITION 318

PROPOSITION 318: reported votes and shares
Choice	Votes	Share
Yes	12,311	75.0%
No	4,096	25.0%

16,407 valid selections. 0 of 39 precincts reporting.

Yes ahead by 8,215 votes (50.1 points).

Statewide forecast: Yes >99%. This is the county's share of a bigger contest.

PROPOSITION 319

PROPOSITION 319: reported votes and shares
Choice	Votes	Share
Yes	10,686	65.3%
No	5,674	34.7%

16,360 valid selections. 0 of 39 precincts reporting.

Yes ahead by 5,012 votes (30.6 points).

Statewide forecast: Yes >99%. This is the county's share of a bigger contest.

PROPOSITION 320

PROPOSITION 320: reported votes and shares
Choice	Votes	Share
Yes	9,876	61.6%
No	6,157	38.4%

16,033 valid selections. 0 of 39 precincts reporting.

Yes ahead by 3,719 votes (23.2 points).

Statewide forecast: No 93%. This is the county's share of a bigger contest.

Judges

Christopher J. O'Neil Court of Appeals, Division II

Shall Judge Christopher O’Neil, Judge of the Court of Appeals Division II, be retained in office?: reported votes and shares
Choice	Votes	Share
Yes	10,848	79.9%
No	2,725	20.1%

13,573 valid selections. 0 of 39 precincts reporting.

Yes ahead by 8,123 votes (59.8 points).

Meets standards in the Commission on Judicial Performance Review · On the bench since 2023

Share of people surveyed who rated Christopher J. O'Neil acceptable or better
Rated acceptable or better	Score	Typical	Responses
Legal ability	94%	97%	18
Integrity	100%	100%	16
Communication	100%	100%	11
Temperament	100%	100%	11
Administration	100%	100%	14

22 of 102 voluntary surveys returned, February–September 2025, the later of two survey periods. Typical, the gold mark, is the median of the 15 appeals and Supreme Court judges reviewed.

Statewide forecast: Yes >99%. This is the county's share of a bigger contest.

Karl C. Eppich Court of Appeals, Division II

Shall Judge Karl Eppich, Judge of the Court of Appeals Division II, be retained in office?: reported votes and shares
Choice	Votes	Share
Yes	10,778	78.7%
No	2,910	21.3%

13,688 valid selections. 0 of 39 precincts reporting.

Yes ahead by 7,868 votes (57.5 points).

Meets standards in the Commission on Judicial Performance Review · On the bench since 2017

At or above the typical judge in every category.

Share of people surveyed who rated Karl C. Eppich acceptable or better
Rated acceptable or better	Score	Typical	Responses
Legal ability	100%	97%	11
Integrity	100%	100%	11
Communication	100%	100%	9
Temperament	100%	100%	9
Administration	100%	100%	11

13 of 89 voluntary surveys returned, February–September 2025, the later of two survey periods. Typical, the gold mark, is the median of the 15 appeals and Supreme Court judges reviewed.

Statewide forecast: Yes >99%. This is the county's share of a bigger contest.

Lacey Stover Gard Court of Appeals, Division II

Shall Judge Lacey Stover Gard, Judge of the Court of Appeals Division II, be retained in office?: reported votes and shares
Choice	Votes	Share
Yes	10,845	79.3%
No	2,837	20.7%

13,682 valid selections. 0 of 39 precincts reporting.

Yes ahead by 8,008 votes (58.5 points).

Meets standards in the Commission on Judicial Performance Review · On the bench since 2023

Furthest below typical: Legal ability, 90% against 97%.

Share of people surveyed who rated Lacey Stover Gard acceptable or better
Rated acceptable or better	Score	Typical	Responses
Legal ability	90%	97%	26
Integrity	95%	100%	22
Communication	93%	100%	11
Temperament	91%	100%	11
Administration	100%	100%	25

31 of 141 voluntary surveys returned, February–September 2025, the later of two survey periods. Typical, the gold mark, is the median of the 15 appeals and Supreme Court judges reviewed.

Statewide forecast: Yes >99%. This is the county's share of a bigger contest.

John R. Lopez IV Arizona Supreme Court

Shall Justice John Lopez IV, Justice of the Supreme Court be retained in office?: reported votes and shares
Choice	Votes	Share
Yes	10,895	78.2%
No	3,043	21.8%

13,938 valid selections. 0 of 39 precincts reporting.

Yes ahead by 7,852 votes (56.3 points).

Meets standards in the Commission on Judicial Performance Review · On the bench since 2017

At or above the typical judge in every category.

Share of people surveyed who rated John R. Lopez IV acceptable or better
Rated acceptable or better	Score	Typical	Responses
Legal ability	100%	97%	15
Integrity	100%	100%	15
Communication	100%	100%	19
Temperament	100%	100%	20
Administration	100%	100%	12

26 of 127 voluntary surveys returned, February–September 2025, the later of two survey periods. Typical, the gold mark, is the median of the 15 appeals and Supreme Court judges reviewed.

Statewide forecast: Yes >99%. This is the county's share of a bigger contest.

Cities & towns

Largest first, using dated population estimates. Population describes the whole municipality and is not used to allocate votes. A place spanning counties has one canonical page linked from each containing county.

Payson16,693 · 2025 estimate
Globe7,191 · 2025 estimate
Star Valley2,538 · 2025 estimate
Miami1,514 · 2025 estimate
Hayden510 · 2025 estimate · also spans Gila / Pinal
Winkelman290 · 2025 estimate · also spans Gila / Pinal

Presidential voting history

Final county returns from 2000–2024. Different offices and electorates make this context for 2026, not a like-for-like estimate of the current election's final result.

Year	Democratic votes	Republican votes	All votes	Margin
2000	7,700	9,158	17,736	R +8.2
2004	8,314	12,343	20,843	R +19.3
2008	7,884	14,095	22,333	R +27.8
2012	7,697	13,455	21,528	R +26.7
2016	7,003	14,182	22,312	R +32.2
2020	8,941	18,371	27,654	R +34.1
2024	8,505	18,910	27,611	R +37.7

Margin is Democratic minus Republican share of all valid votes. Historical returns are final; current returns remain unofficial. MIT Election Data and Science Lab (CC0 (MEDSL)); Polling Forecast; original VEST (CC BY 4.0 (VEST / Polling Forecast)); Polling Forecast; original MEDSL (CC0 (MEDSL); CC BY 4.0 (Polling Forecast redistribution)).

Sources & scope

Reported contest data: Arizona Secretary of State results. Only this county's components are shown; these are not full statewide totals or a complete local ballot.
Gila County election office for local ballot information, official returns and address-specific resources.
Population: U.S. Census Bureau, July 1, 2025 estimates. Counts are for residents, not registered voters or ballots.
Election rules and reporting limits: our methodology. Judicial background: Arizona judicial performance review.

We do not infer local winners, certification, turnout, remaining ballots or citywide or districtwide results from precinct percentages, population, county totals or the number of seats. Your own ballot depends on your registered address.