Arizona Senate President Karen Fann (R-Prescott) accused Maricopa County’s top election officials of gaslighting Attorney General Mark Brnovich as part of an ongoing massive cover-up of their alleged mistakes in the 2020 election. She asserted that Brnovich was doing his job, even at the risk of facing media attacks that could undermine his senate campaign.
Fann noted that Recorder Stephen Richer had no reason to participate in the alleged cover-up because he didn’t assume his role until January 2021.
“It still goes beyond me that they are still denying the mistakes that happened,” said Fann. “[Richer] joined up with the board of supervisors to do this massive coverup. Mind you, they kept saying everything was fine and perfect. No it wasn’t.”
The senate president appeared on “The Conservative Circus” with host James T. Harris. She brought up past admissions by the county as evidence of a massive cover-up.
Fann gave one example of the county’s admission that one 2020 election poll worker double-counted 50 ballots. She said that although that amount didn’t seem like a lot in the context of a presidential election, it would’ve mattered in the 2016 primary election between Congressman Andy Biggs (R-AZ-05) and opponent Christine Jones. Their race necessitated a recount; Biggs ultimately won by 27 votes.
As an example of the county contradicting its claims on the nonexistence of widespread fraud, Fann cited Richer’s emails. She read aloud from one, in which Richer wrote of the existence of “plenty of instances of actual, prosecuted and convicted election law violations [from] both administrators and normal citizens,” some of which he asserted were recent.
Additionally, Fann revealed that Richer’s emails identified major issues with chain of custody and signature verification.
“But now? Nope. He’s part of the cover-up by saying, ‘Oh no, everything is fine,’” said Fann. “The Arizona Senate was the only body in the entire nation to step up and actually say, ‘Let’s get to the bottom of these rumors. Let’s get to the bottom of these allegations.’ The Senate has been attacked from day one — before the auditors were selected, before anything happened.”
AZ State Senate President Karen Fann discusses AZ AG Mark Brnovich claiming 200 ballots that have no chain of custo https://t.co/xKre6loBvI
Fann’s remarks on Thursday were in response to the actions of the Maricopa County election officials this week.
On Wednesday, the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors and Richer presented a unified front against Brnovich’s interim report on the 2020 election. The officials accused Brnovich of lying and using the election controversy to score “cheap political points.”
The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors and Recorder accused Attorney General Mark Brnovich of executing a dishonest investigation into the 2020 election. In a public letter, the election officials claimed that Brnovich’s interim report on the 2020 election released last month was nothing but misinformation intended to “score cheap political points.” Brnovich is a candidate in the upcoming U.S. Senate race.
“Rather than being truthful about what your office has learned about the election, you have omitted pertinent information, misrepresented facts, and cited distorted data to seed doubt about the conduct of elections in Maricopa County,” read the letter.
The election officials then refuted claims made by Brnovich: that up to 200,000 ballots lacked proper chain of custody, that Maricopa County didn’t cooperate fully with Brnovich’s investigation, that the county relied on artificial intelligence to execute signature verification, and that the number of rejected ballots were too low. They also challenged Brnovich on his decision to publish an unprecedented interim report, characterizing it as improper commentary on an ongoing investigation.
On Wednesday morning, the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors held a press conference during their special and formal meeting. Chairman Bill Gates said that Brnovich’s interim report was backing fraud and necessitated a response from the board.
“We’re all Republicans who actually have the statutory responsibility to run these elections, and we’re saying these allegations are false, that there’s no systemic fraud,” said Gates. “Our democracy is on the line here.”
On Wednesday afternoon, Maricopa County Recorder Stephen Richer reiterated one of the promises made in their letter: that the county would submit public records requests of all of the public records requests sent to the attorney general’s office for the last two years.
Richer explained that the goal of the massive undertaking was to see how many of those requests Brnovich’s office fulfilled. He accused Brnovich of living in a glass house.
The county is making a public records request of the Attorney General's Office for all public records requests the AG has received in the past two years and if and when those requests were fulfilled.
I'm going to bet somebody lives in a glass house.
— Stephen Richer—Maricopa Cnty Recorder (prsnl acct) (@stephen_richer) May 4, 2022
Brnovich called the county’s response “disappointing.” He accused Maricopa County officials of casting stones instead of working alongside his office to resolve election integrity concerns.
“The reality is we issued an interim report that identified several issues that need to be addressed,” said Brnovich.
Brnovich held that up to 200,000 ballots lacked proper chain of custody. Brnovich also challenged the supervisors’ office to offer a clear, consistent answer on signature verification processes, pointing out the range of times they estimated it took to verify a signature.
While many people are frustrated, the important thing to remember is that we should all want the same thing — fair elections that maintain accuracy and promote public confidence.
Here is my response to the special meeting from the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors. pic.twitter.com/6phLqURWXn
Richer called Brnovich’s statement “nonsense.” He said that Brnovich wasn’t being impartial about the 2020 election, referencing the attorney general’s interview with right-wing talk show host Steve Bannon.
lol. This is such nonsense. Show me where I brought up "ballot counting."
Also, pretty rich of you to say, "let's be civil," after you issue an interim report (which you know is a ridiculous thing) and insinuate the county broke the law.
Voters across Arizona who are registered as Independents or who have not listed a political party preference have a few weeks to request early voting ballots for the Aug. 2 Democratic and Republican primaries.
The Arizona Secretary of State’s Office shows 34.15 percent of all Arizona registered voters were listed as Libertarians or “other” as of Jan. 2. And each of those “other” voters have the option of requesting a Democratic or Republican primary ballot without formally changing their party affiliation.
In preparation of the upcoming primaries, Arizona’s 15 county recorders recently mailed out a “90-day notice” to all voters on the active early voting list (formerly the permanent early voting list). The mailing seeks to ensure current addresses are on file before primary ballots are mailed out in late July.
The notice also provides voters with information on how to be removed from the AEVL if they don’t want ballots mailed to them.
However, the most critical impact of the notice is the reminder to Independent and Party Not Designated (PND) voters on the AEVL that they may vote in either of the two main primaries if they request a ballot within the next few weeks. (Voters may not request a Libertarian primary ballot as that party’s primary is closed to registered Libertarians.)
Maricopa County Recorder Stephen Richer recently took to Twitter to promote the 90-day mailing, but referred only to “Independents” when discussing the right to request either a Democratic or Republican ballot. Cochise County Recorder David Stevens and others have confirmed to Arizona Daily Independent this includes voters whose registration card shows PND for party not designated.
The mailings are also raising questions about why several former voters have received an AEVL notification packet from Richer in 2022 despite not living in the county since before the 2020 election. In some instances, a voter summoned for jury duty may have been excused after providing proof of a move, but the county recorder must ask for such information to be shared.
The same exchange of information is necessary when a death is reported. In addition, a registered voter convicted of a felony has restrictions on their voting rights as of the date of sentencing, but a county recorder must ensure the information makes its way from the clerk of the court’s office.
Stevens says registered voters on the AEVL who need to make changes to their voter file should return the AEVL card as soon as possible. Other voters can call their county recorder. In the meantime, qualified voters who are not yet registered have only until July 5 to become registered for the August primary.
The Arizona SOS shows 34.5 percent of voters registered as Republicans and 31.35 percent as Democrats, so the impact of Independent or Party Not Designated voters will likely have a major effect in August, as winners in Arizona’s primary elections are determined by plurality vote.
This means the candidate who receives the highest number of votes wins, even if the candidate did not receive the majority of all votes cast in that contest. Such an outcome is expected in the race for U.S. Senate with five Republican candidates: Ret. USAF Major General Mick McGuire, ACC member Justin Olson, venture capitalist Blake Masters, Attorney General Mark Brnovich, and businessman Jim Lamon).
It is likely none of the five Republicans can receive more than 50 percent of all votes cast, so the highest vote-getter will be listed on the 2022 General Election ballot against Sen. Mark Kelly and Libertarian candidate Marc Victor.
On Tuesday a groundbreaking occurred for Tucson’s first forthcoming $6.8 million “medical respite center” exclusively for the homeless. Medical respite centers are short-term residences and caregiving locations for the homeless that are ill or injured enough to warrant assistance but not hospitalization.
As of mid-March, the initiative raised just under $3.5 million. Major funders include the Diane & Bruce Halle Foundation, St. Joseph Catholic Healthcare Endowment Fund, Connie Hillman Foundation, Southwest Catholic Health Network, Ginny L. Clements and Tom Rogers, O’Rielly Family Foundation, Del E. Webb Foundation, Jim and Vicki Click, William and Mary Ross Foundation, Margaret E. Mooney Foundation, PetSmart Charities, Union Pacific, Raskob Foundation, and the Sundt Foundation.
In September, AZ Free News reported that an undisclosed number of Haitian illegal immigrants and refugees were bussed or flown into Tucson. CCS ran a shelter in Tucson called Casas Alitas.
Also behind the medical respite center is El Rio Health Center, a dental and medical center that receives federal funds from Health and Human Services (HHS) and is has federal status under the Federal Public Health Service (PHS).
According to the Tucson Housing and Community Development, there were an estimated 1,660 homeless people on any given night in Pima County in 2020. Those experiencing chronic homelessness in the county were estimated to be around 380.
Tucson is plagued with a homelessness crisis currently. Councilman Steve Kozachik said that the current number of homeless people are beyond past trends. Those rising numbers correspond with an increase in homeless deaths, as reported by the Pima County Medical Examiner’s Office.
In a statement to KGUN9, Kozachik said that he was attempting to convince the rest of the council to establish controlled encampments to counteract the masses of temporary encampments occurring naturally where the homeless congregate and settle.
“I think the rest of the council simply does not like the optics, and they believe allowing an encampment to exist constitutes a failure,” said Kozachik. “I have a different perspective. Squeezing the balloon and moving people around from camp-to-camp week to week is the failure.”
Controlled encampments have begun to pop up in the major cities experiencing homelessness crises in other states, such as Denver, Colorado and Albuquerque, New Mexico. Denver launched its first controlled encampment last November. In April, the city and county asked federal appeals judges to rescind court-ordered standards on homeless encampment cleanups intended to preserve public health and safety.
Albuquerque hasn’t established controlled encampments yet, but it’s likely they will soon. Their city council is looking to amend its zoning code to allow for encampments managed mostly by churches or nonprofits: tents with facilities like restrooms called “safe outdoor spaces.”
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
Pima County Attorney Laura Conover promised to break Arizona law if the Supreme Court overrules Roe v. Wade and the state outlaws abortion. Conover vowed that those seeking or assisting in abortions wouldn’t receive any jail time on her watch.
“We will do everything in our power to ensure that no person seeking or assisting in an abortion will spend a night in jail,” said Conover.
A leaked SCOTUS opinion is unprecedented, and so as Pima County Attorney, this is apparently the moment when I need to reassure of what I have always said: We will do everything in our power to ensure that no person seeking or assisting in an abortion will spend a night in jail.
Arizona’s latest abortion restriction, SB1164, banned abortions after 15 weeks. Governor Doug Ducey signed it into law in March.
However, if the Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade’s legalized abortion in deciding Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, Arizona may revert to its original outright ban on abortion dating back to the beginning of its statehood. SB1164’s language reflected support of that outcome.
“This act does not: […] Repeal, by implication or otherwise, section 13-3602, Arizona Revised Statutes, or any other applicable state law regulating or restricting abortion,” reads the law.
From 1901, before Arizona achieved statehood in 1912, to the Roe v. Wade ruling in 1973, Arizona outlawed abortion completely. Later versions of the law retained the majority of the original language but modified punishments — up until the 1973 Supreme Court ruling, anyone who performed abortions received two to five years’ prison time.
If the Supreme Court overturns the precedents established by Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, then the state may return to its total ban, which some legislators have identified as a “trigger law”: A.R.S. 13:3603.
Conover wouldn’t be the only county attorney to defy an Arizona law banning abortion. Democratic candidate for Maricopa County Attorney Julie Gunnigle pledged to disregard any restrictions or bans on abortion if she wins. Her promise focused on the latest law prohibiting abortions after 15 weeks.
Wednesday night, pro-abortion activists gathered outside the Arizona State Capitol to protest SB1164 and the Supreme Court’s draft majority opinion.
The 10-year combined impact of Arizona’s recently enacted 2.5 percent flat rate income tax along with repealing the state’s progressive income tax structure with an 8.0 percent top rate included in 2020’s illegal Proposition 208 would increase Arizona’s GDP by about $11.9 billion with about 58,000 more employed workers.
That’s the conclusion from Common Sense Institute Arizona which took a deep look into the long-term effect of the Arizona Supreme Court’s rejection of Prop 208 and the signing into law of Arizona’s first flat tax.
“Generally, economists agree that high income taxes are economically harmful, particularly when they tax capital gains and other income on savings and investment at the same rate as ordinary income (as in Arizona and most other states),” the CSI report states. “This is because the tax discourages taxpayers from saving or investing ordinary income in the taxing jurisdiction, and instead spending it today on consumption locally or moving their investment to lower taxed jurisdictions.”
Arizona is one of 42 states with an individual income tax. When first enacted in 1933, the state had 11 tax rates ranging from 1.0 percent to 4.5 percent. Over the years, the tax rates have changed, bringing Arizona to its current four rates which range from 2.59 to 4.5 percent, the 40th lowest in the country.
According to Glenn Farley, CSI-Arizona’s Director of Policy & Research, Arizona is the 11th state to adopt a simplified flat tax structure. And when the state’s 2.5 percent flat rate is transitioned in, it will give Arizonans “the lowest income tax rate in the country” among the states with such a tax.
Farley added that Arizona currently has a happy revenue problem, in that the State has experienced unprecedented annual growth in income and sales tax collections since Fiscal Year 2018.
“Arizona is collecting at least $2.4 billion more per year due to the 2019 Tax
Omnbius, passed by the Arizona state legislature, than it was under the pre-2018 tax base,” the CSI report states. “The problem is best addressed by revisiting the state’s tax structure adopted in 2019, and not by trying to use one-time spending to absorb the excess cash. The 2.50% flat tax plan helps further the intended goal begun back in 2019: a revenue-neutral modernization of the state tax code, and not a permanent tax increase.”
The transition to a flat tax comes as Arizona continues to enjoy unprecedented revenue windfalls. The report notes that by FY2025, current trends and forecasts show the State General Fund adding $5.8 billion in new revenue despite all taxpayers paying in at a lower rate.
Which makes it all the more important that Prop 208 with its surcharge to a 8.0 percent rate was invalidated on constitutional grounds, the report states.
“Economic theory suggests high income taxpayers will relocate income in response to tax and other fiscal policy, without necessarily relocating themselves,” according to the CSI report. “A 77% increase in the states marginal tax rate on its highest earners would have reduced both Arizona’s long-term growth prospects and short-term revenue collections.”
