Maricopa County says its current election plan is adequate to ensure everyone will have an opportunity to vote in this election, despite additional reports of long voting lines and wait times.
The county board of supervisors and recorder’s office issued their assurance through the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office (MCAO) last Friday in response to a Thursday letter from GOP congressional candidate Abraham Hamadeh and the Republican National Committee (RNC) requesting a new election plan.
Deputy County Attorney Joseph E. La Rue issued the response letter on behalf of MCAO. LaRue began his letter with a remark aimed at the author of the Hamadeh-RNC letter, Harmeet Dhillon, for submitting the letter to the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors and Maricopa County Recorder’s Office rather than MCAO.
“We do not know how they do things in California, where you are barred,” said La Rue. “But here in Arizona, it is an ethical violation for an attorney to communicate about the subject of her representation of her client with someone that the attorney knows is represented.”
As the Arizona Daily Independentreported, the Hamadeh-RNC letter claimed that it took voters longer on average to complete their ballots than the county predicted: an average of 15 minutes compared with the county’s 12-minute estimate, due to the ballot consisting of two pages.
La Rue responded that this comparison was “inaccurate” because it was based “on outdated information.” La Rue further dismissed Dhillon’s reliance on Verity Vote data, characterizing it as a “discredited organization that has been shown to play fast and loose with the facts” based on VoteBeat reporting.
La Rue clarified that the board of supervisors had expanded the in-person voting plan during its September 9 meeting to accommodate the two-page ballot.
La Rue also defended the county’s decision on the number of voting locations, check-in stations, and voting booths. He reported that the county had expanded the numbers of these election components adequately from past elections: a 40 percent increase since 2020 and a 10 percent increase since 2022 in voting locations; a 35 percent increase since 2020 and 33 percent increase since 2022 in check-in stations; and a 60 percent increase since 2020 and a 23 percent increase since 2022 in voting booths.
At the close of his response letter, La Rue concluded with a decisive “no” on the request from Hamadeh and the RNC to devise a new election plan.
“In light of the county’s extensive preparations for in-person voting on November 5, 2024, our clients do not see the need for an emergency meeting with your clients,” stated La Rue.
The county’s denial of a request for expanding election location capacities, such as establishing additional voting booths, came ahead of Monday reports from the media and individual voters on long wait times and lengthy lines for in-person early voting.
Maricopa County has warned that it could take them anywhere from 10 to 13 days to count all the ballots, due to the nearly 2.1 million mail-in ballots requested in this election. The county came up with the timeline based on the percentage of voters who waited to turn in their early ballots closer to or on Election Day in the 2022 election — almost 20 percent.
AZ Free News is your #1 source for Arizona news and politics. You can send us news tips using this link.
Abe Hamadeh argued for a new trial on Tuesday before the Mohave County Superior Court.
The judge, Lee Jantzen, seemed interested in sampling the evidence presented by Hamadeh’s team in the case, Boyd v. Mayes, despite multiple objections from opposition. Arguments presented by the opposition — the attorney general, secretary of state, and Maricopa and Pima counties — mainly focused on the amount of time that’s transpired since the election and Hamadeh’s December trial. Arguments presented by Hamadeh’s team focused on evidence of allegedly disenfranchised voters, claiming that hundreds of “lost” (uncounted) votes from undervotes and provisional ballots proved that Hamadeh won the race.
Lawyers present for the oral arguments included former assistant attorney general Jen Wright, State Rep. Alex Kolodin (R-LD03), and James Sabalos for Hamadeh; Alexis Danneman and Paul Eckstein for Attorney General Kris Mayes; Craig Morgan for Secretary of State Adrian Fontes; Daniel Jurkowitz for Pima County; and Joseph La Rue for Maricopa County.
Sabalos opened up the oral arguments, quoting Thomas Jefferson and summarizing general discoveries in the course of their months-long review of voter data as a precursor to Wright’s arguments.
“We do not have a government by the majority; we have a government by the majority who vote,” quoted Sabalos.
Sabalos insisted their case wasn’t about fraud, but about the evidence and facts supporting the reality of Hamadeh as the winner of last November’s election contest. He claimed that Gov. Katie Hobbs, in her former capacity as secretary of state, was aware of and neglected to immediately publicize 63 Pinal County undervotes that lent to Hamadeh’s claims last December of lost votes.
Sabalos said this intentional concealment of facts served to handicap their team’s due diligence of reviewing election data for the courts. Sabalos further claimed that there were 76,339 votes counted as undervotes in the attorney general’s contest. Of the approximately 2,000 ballots they inspected, 14 were misread (.61 percent). With that percentage applied to the larger total of undervotes statewide, Sabalos said that amounted to 466 or more votes — more than the 288-vote lead Mayes holds over Hamadeh.
Sabalos then claimed that there were uncounted provisional ballots that constituted legal votes, and that the majority of those would’ve turned in favor of Hamadeh.
“We don’t come today with hyperbole or speculation. We come with some reasonably solid evidence, and we need a heck of a lot more for this judge and this court to get its hands around,” said Sabalos.
Wright followed up Sabalos’ arguments by first focusing on Hobbs. She said that Hobbs didn’t fulfill her duty of being a neutral, nominal party, since Hobbs argued heavily that Hamadeh had no evidence to support his claims, while allegedly knowing of the dozens of undervotes recovered during the recount, and pushed for his case to be dismissed. Wright further noted that Maricopa County Elections Director Scott Jarrett admitted during the December trial that he wasn’t sure why certain votes weren’t counted, and instead counted as undervotes.
Wright expanded on Sabalos’ claim of the 63 undervotes, noting that they were counted as valid during the recount. Wright asserted that Hobbs knew of this fact, which she said rendered Hamadeh’s claims during the December trial valid. Wright also dismissed Hobbs’ claim that she was under an order preventing her from disclosing the undervotes, since the order only applied to counties discussing the recount results from vote totals. Wright claimed that the judge would’ve permitted Hamadeh a review of the evidence had Hobbs been forthright all those months ago.
“I find it questionable that a government agent would take support of or opposition to a candidate in an election contest,” said Wright.
Wright further noted that Hamadeh was unable to obtain the provisional ballot data from Maricopa County until days after the trial occurred, further hindering his ability to meet statutory deadlines.
When Wright attempted to discuss the evidentiary numbers on undervotes, both Mayes and Fontes’ legal teams raised objections. The judge overruled their objections, however.
Wright claimed that their team interviewed hundreds of high-propensity voters affected by statewide computer system changes, which allegedly altered their registration address without their consent and therefore deprived them of the right to vote. She claimed that over 1,100 Election Day provisional voters were disenfranchised.
Election Day votes went overwhelmingly for Hamadeh: over 69 percent to nearly 29 percent for Mayes. Wright said that this would mean about 760 of provisional ballots would be for Hamadeh, and 316 for Mayes. By Wright’s math, Hamadeh would prevail on the provisional ballot issue alone by 165 votes.
Wright further noted that their team had collected sworn affidavits of hundreds of voters claiming disenfranchisement due to bureaucratic failures. When she attempted to read the account of one allegedly disenfranchised voter, Mayes’ team raised an objection. The judge promptly overruled.
The allegedly disenfranchised Maricopa County voter, Marlena, attempted to vote on Election Day but was denied. Marlena had reportedly experienced issues with the county’s registration system for months: earlier that year, she discovered that her registration had changed without her knowledge and consent. Wright presented evidence that on October 10, 2022, Marlena attempted to correct her voter registration before the deadline. Wright also presented evidence from Maricopa County confirming Marlena’s registration. Yet, she was denied on Election Day.
Danneman, Mayes’ lawyer, said Hamadeh’s claims were speculative and based on unsworn opinions. She emphasized repeatedly the timeliness of his contest, noting that it has been over five months since the December trial and that their team could only present an argument that they needed more time to look for votes.
Danneman further rejected the argument that Hamadeh should be granted a new trial to undertake further investigation. She said that evidence must be material, in existence at the time of trial, and not be discovered with reasonable diligence.
She added that Hamadeh’s request for a more complete ballot inspection proved there wasn’t any newly-discovered evidence warranting a new trial.
The provisional voters list didn’t hold much weight in Danneman’s view. She claimed Hamadeh was undertaking a “fishing expedition” for evidence, which she pointed out was prohibited by court precedent.
“This list of names proves nothing,” said Danneman. “The plaintiffs had their day in court.”
Morgan, with Fontes, added that it was “long past time” for this election contest to end. He said that Hamadeh’s challenge impugns the validity of election processes as well as the integrity of election officials.
La Rue with Maricopa County concurred. Jurkowitz with Pima County argued further that statute time bars any further contest.
Following the hearing, Hamadeh expressed optimism that the oral arguments ultimately were in his favor.
On Tuesday, Maricopa County sent a cease-and-desist letter to board of supervisors candidate Gail Golec for advising voters to steal election pens. The county gives voters a specific type of felt-tipped pen to fill out their in-person ballots.
Maricopa County Deputy Attorney Joseph La Rue requested that Golec issue a public retraction urging voters not to steal the pens.
“As you well know, theft of any sort is unlawful; moreover encouraging theft of the fast-drying ink pens specifically recommended for election day voting is a deliberate attempt to interfere with election administration and will have the harmful effect of delaying the vote tabulation of election day ballots, as the wet ink harms the vote center tabulation machines,” wrote La Rue.
La Rue’s letter came hours after Golec persuaded voters to steal pens via Telegram, an encrypted messaging service increasingly relied on by right-wing individuals as an alternative social media platform.
“I just had someone give me an idea. When voting take the pentel pen with you and leave a blue pen behind. Eventually they will run out,” wrote Golec.
Later on Twitter, Golec alluded to her advice to steal pens with the hashtag, “#LeaveNoPentelBehind.”
Election Day in AZ! Do not drop off your ballot. It will not be counted today b4 they call the races. Exchange your ballot after voiding it and get an Election Day ballot. Vote in Blue Ink! #StopTheSteal#LeaveNoPentelBehind
— Maricopa Cty Candidate for Supervisor Gail Golec (@GailGolec) August 2, 2022
Golec dismissed the county’s warning as a distraction from election integrity. She doubled down with a hashtag associated with her call to action, #UseBlueInk. As of press time, the Telegram post wasn’t removed.
Ironically, concerned about law breaking, Maricopa County is really afraid that people will steal the pens. What if they ran out and they did not get enough ballots into the adjudication cycle? My intention is to Protect Our Vote, not encourage you to steal pens. #USEBLUEINKpic.twitter.com/FrkdvMrwMf
— Maricopa Cty Candidate for Supervisor Gail Golec (@GailGolec) August 2, 2022
Several hours before Golec shared Maricopa County’s cease-and-desist letter, AZ Free News inquired with the county whether voters were stealing poll pens and/or replacing them with their preferred pens. The county didn’t respond by press time.
The county’s elections department announced Tuesday morning that they resolved reports of stolen pens, as well as other minor technology issues.
More than 18K voters have successfully cast a ballot in person so far today! Minor tech issues have been resolved as well as reports of stolen pens. Please do not remove any voting materials from the polling place, including pens.https://t.co/WXsuEj0sDe
— Maricopa County Elections Department (@MaricopaVote) August 2, 2022
Golec’s advice was based on her claims that the tabulation machines wouldn’t be able to read ballots marked with the county’s felt-tipped pens. Golec also claimed that the felt-tipped pens were part of a bigger conspiracy to rig elections.
— Maricopa Cty Candidate for Supervisor Gail Golec (@GailGolec) August 2, 2022
The candidate advised voters repeatedly to use a blue ink pen of their choice, not the felt-tipped pens provided by the county.
Do not drop off your ballot. Exchange your Early Ballot for an Election Day ballot and put it through the machine so that it will count on Election Day. They will call the Election without counting your vote! Be sure to #UseBlueInk if possible, NO Felt Tip pens. https://t.co/wg8uJpqN05
— Maricopa Cty Candidate for Supervisor Gail Golec (@GailGolec) August 1, 2022
Golec made headlines last month for her claim that former President Donald Trump endorsed her campaign. The Arizona Daily Independent reported that sources close to Trump denied that the former president ever issued a formal endorsement for Golec.
The county supervisor candidate substantiated her claim of Trump’s endorsement with a brief exchange the two shared: Golec interrupted part of Trump’s speech addressing Maricopa County at Mar-A-Lago, telling the former president that she needed him to get her into office. Trump replied that he endorsed her, but didn’t mention her by name and never issued a formal endorsement later.
During the Arizona Senate’s audit of the 2020 election, Golec communicated frequently with Ken Bennett, the audit liaison, to share concerns that Antifa and Black Lives Matter (BLM) activists were attempting to undermine the audit. Those exchanges came to light through the release of communications data related to the audit.
As proof of her claims that BLM was near the site of the audit, Golec sent Bennett a picture of a bus with “Black Lives Matter” wrapping. The bus belonged to the Toronto Raptors, an NBA team, not BLM.
Golic submitted numerous questions and requests about election security to Bennett as well as Senate President Karen Fann (R-Prescott).
Gail Golec was very concerned about Antifa and BLM interfering with the Maricopa audit. These are texts she sent to AZ Audit Senate Liaison Ken Bennet. To Ken's credit he did basically brushed her off. pic.twitter.com/jEG7afaCCM
Golic characterized Fann in a recent campaign ad as a politician willing to undermine election integrity to serve her own interests. She cited the timeline of the State Senate’s settlement concerning its subpoena of Maricopa County in September, followed by the state’s contracting of Fann’s family company and 10 other developers in October to widen the I-17. Golic claimed that the settlement meant the county didn’t have to supply its routers.
However, the county did agree to hand over its routers. Fann summarized that the settlement gave the senate everything they wanted and had the county drop its $2.8 million lawsuit.
HUGE win for the Az Senate today! Maricopa settlement gives us all the data needed to complete the review of the routers & splunk log to the most comprehensive election audit in history. We got everything we need and more. Maricopa County goes home with its tail between its legs
Maricopa County announced earlier this year that it would cease using Sharpies at the polls, instead relying on Pentel felt-tipped pens. Election officials offered multiple reasons for the change, with some noting public distrust of Sharpies following the 2020 election and the ensuing “Sharpiegate” controversy.
The county’s chief reason for the switch concerned faster ink drying times for improved ballot processing by the tabulation machines.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.