Chairman Gates Responds to Latest Subpoena Related to Elections
The Board of Supervisors has received another subpoena regarding the 2020 General Election. This subpoena was issued by Senator Kelly Townsend yesterday. My colleagues and I will meet soon to discuss an appropriate response.
It is worth noting Maricopa County has provided thousands of documents, data, and equipment to the Arizona Senate concerning the 2020 election.
As of the first week in February, Maricopa County had produced more than 4,400 documents and five detailed PowerPoint slide decks to the Attorney General’s Office. In addition, the Elections Department answered all the questions from AG investigators and provided in-depth tours of Election facilities.
This latest request for records was not a “3rd” request as suggested by the subject line. The request arrived less than two weeks ago during the Tempe City Council Election, is being processed, and records will be provided in a reasonable period of time as prescribed by Arizona law. Given the volume of correspondence between investigators and the County, it doesn’t take a letter, much less a subpoena to gather public information. A phone call is an effective form of communication.
Senator Townsend’s subpoena specifically references a “study” conducted by Shiva Ayyadurai that points to voter signatures and ballot envelopes which are not public record. This is surprising because the County has not released this protected voter information to any organization other than the Arizona Senate following subpoenas in 2021; and the Senator is using the discredited work of Ayyadurai as a basis for this new subpoena. Perhaps Senator Townsend should suggest the Election Integrity Unity (EIU) ask these questions of Arizona Senate President Fann and “audit” subcontractors:
- Why were voter signatures posted online, which is a possible violation of A.R.S. § 16-168(F)?
- Did the Senate’s subcontractor notify the plaintiffs within 48 hours of the signature comparison as required by a settlement agreement in the Maricopa County Superior Court (Arizona Democratic Party, et al. v. Fann)?
- How is comparing signatures from one unrelated public recorded document to an early ballot envelope signature considered a viable way of proving identity for voting purposes?
These questions don’t even begin to address the faulty data extrapolation used in the report. Given the number of false and misleading claims issued in EchoMail’s September 2021 report to the Senate, it’s not surprising this more recent report also uses faulty analysis to draw the conclusions Ayyadurai desires.
It is also interesting that of all the exchanges between the County and the AG’s office, this one was made public, and by the Senate President no less.
The 2020 election is over. County staff spent thousands of hours responding to the Senate’s inquiry of the 2020 elections. The Board of Supervisors continues to stand by the integrity of our workers and the effective checks and balances in place that allow us to provide free, fair, and accurate elections.
Maricopa County has consistently refuted falsehoods and shared facts about election administration which you can see at JustTheFacts.vote.
|
