BISBEE — The Cochise County Board of Supervisors has been notified by Arizona Assistant Attorney General Robert McCarr, along with the Open Conference Law Enforcement Team, of multiple open conference law complaints and has been given 20 days to explain its action. was given.
These complaints include a personal lawsuit filed by attorney Brian Brem against former election administrator Lisa Mara. Makar said, “Supervisors Tom Crosby and Peggy Judd, who together made up a quorum on the board, met privately without notice to discuss legal action and, ultimately, electoral commissioner Lisa.・We have officially filed a lawsuit against Mara.”
He said Judd and Crosby hired attorney Brian Brem to represent them in the lawsuit without a public meeting, and apparently met again in public to drop the lawsuit.
Supervisor Anne English was unaware of her colleague’s behavior.
Makar also accused Crosby of deputy county civil affairs attorney Christine Roberts and county administrator Richard Karwatka from the county civil affairs deputy attorney general because his conversation deviated from the intent of the agenda for the discussion of the county’s flood district’s $1.5 million grant. for stormwater management projects that notified supervisors of two instances of refusal to follow the legal advice of
At the July 26, 2022 meeting, Crosby began speaking about his belief that the formation of the San Pedro Riverbank National Reserve was illegal.
A separate allegation of violations of the Open Meeting Act relates to the April 5, 2022 meeting, in which an off-topic comment was made on an agenda item regarding amendments to an intergovernmental agreement between Cochise Health and Social Services and the Arizona Department of Health Services. gone.
Election affairs transfer problem
In a letter dated March 1, Arizona Assistant Attorney General Lucy Davis, along with the public meeting team, submitted additional questions for the February 24 work session. In a working session, Crosby asked other supervisors whether there was “consensus” on whether the board “would vote on issues related to voting machines and direct county registrars to take specific actions.” I asked Board attorneys advised and opposed it on several occasions that soliciting votes during working sessions violated the Open Conference Act. But supervisor Crosby kept asking if there was “consensus.” “
At the February 28 regular meeting, Mr. Davis noted that Mr. Crosby had submitted various documents regarding the transfer of election duties to Mr. Stevens. The conference agenda document differed from that published to the public.
Crosby introduced two drafts without publication, called the Stevens draft and the Crosby version. Crosby and Judd “discussed wording and amendments,” which were not reflected in the published draft contract.
Mr. Davis noted that “under ARS § 28-431.02(H), publicly posted agenda items must “list specific issues to be discussed,” and that other issues may be “discussed, considered.” The agenda did not indicate that the Board would consider any amendments subsequently made to the posted draft contract.
“It is not clear when, how and with whom the amendments referred to were made, the various drafts made, or whether these discussions and deliberations should have taken place in a publicly notified regular meeting. is not.”
These two complaints must be addressed by March 15th.
“You must reply with any objections to this inquiry or reasons for non-compliance. Failure to timely respond to this letter may result in the discovery of other violations and the imposition of appropriate remedies.”
Arizona Attorney General Joshua Bender sent a letter to the Board and County Attorney Brian McIntyre on February 27, warning of the move to transfer duties from the Electoral Division to Stevens, stating: . The Board’s intended course of action. “
Bender is concerned about delegating electoral duties for the board and county administrators to Stevens.
he wrote: Nor does the draft agreement address the authority of the Board and the Registrar to extend the Registrar’s powers beyond what Congress has provided for in statute.
“Title 11 recognizes intergovernmental agreements, which do not authorize any public authority to exercise any power or to exercise or become involved in accordance with other provisions of law. I am not allowed to work for a company.
“If you know the legal authority of the draft contract, please provide it promptly.”
Crosby warned
Speakers English, Roberts, Karvatska and McIntyre have convened numerous times over the past two years to warn that Crosby’s insistence that he deviate from the topic will be ignored and only verbally attacked.
The Board’s April 5 meeting included an agenda item for a one-year extension of the intergovernmental agreement between Cochise Health and Social Services and the Arizona Department of Health Services. In partnership with Cochise Community Health Clinics Inc. he will continue the COVID-19 testing program. The county received $1 million for its testing program, but still had to spend $177,931.
Crosby asked CHSS director Alicia Thompson whether the state has lifted emergency orders issued in 2020, and people with demonstrable immunity who have not been vaccinated will need to receive the COVID-19 vaccine series. We asked if there is, and if the vaccine adverse event reporting system is under-reporting. English and Roberts cautioned against her possible OML violations on these questions.
He told Roberts: If it’s a test for OML violations, that’s fine. “
Roberts replied, “You are deliberately violating the OML.”
Crosby said: you are not the judge “
Roberts said, “And you are not a lawyer.”
Thompson wondered if she should answer his question. She asked if she could be complicit in the OML violation.
Roberts told her she didn’t have to respond if she felt she was in danger.
Later, in a working session on May 10, supervisors and staff discussed how to deal with Crosby’s frequent flaunting of the OML and how to establish stricter procedures to deal with potential violations. We talked. Universal.
“As chair, I have a responsibility to stick to the agenda that is posted,” English told Crosby. “I know we clashed on this one. You use the word free speech sometimes. But free speech stops when you stray from the topic of the agenda.”
At the May 25 meeting, when a proposal was made to allow the county attorney’s office to notify OMLET of meeting violations, English and Judd approved the action. Crosby objected.
Crosby concludes: There is a difference in how they are treated by the board. “
English replied: I don’t want to conflict with members of the board, but you were warned when the county attorney said you were turning.
“I don’t want to be a party to OML violations. I’m not going to physically bind you. But when I say and the county attorney says it’s off topic, you have to stop.”
Responding to investigations
Former Bisbee mayor David Smith filed a complaint with the Attorney General’s Office after rumors surfaced about a lawsuit against Mara in mid-November.
The former Republican said he is now an independent. He had 28 complaints filed against me as mayor and they responded quickly. Of course, the complaint proved unfounded. And they were frivolous.
“I can’t help but think that this postponement was politically motivated.
“I think Chris Mays will do the right thing. Thing.”
English said: Boards and staff have long recognized the need to stop violating public meeting laws. Only the Attorney General can do that. “
She went on to say that the violation was “suspected” and that the Office of the Attorney General would investigate the complaint.
“I’m glad they investigated,” she said. “I’ve been feeling frustrated almost from day one. Frustration kept building and there was no way to stop it. He believes in free speech. He made a statement prepared to do so.” and find a place to put it.”
She suggested that if Crosby wanted to be heard or seek a work session to discuss his thoughts, he should direct his off-topic remarks to the media. chose to do it when it was not on the agenda and it is not appropriate.”
Judd is putting together paperwork to explain to the Attorney General how a case against Marla was proposed.
The lawsuit against Marra was DocuSigned by herself and Crosby due to time constraints, with the intention of having a public meeting after the lawsuit was filed.
“But then he (Brem) pulled it. It was only effective for 24 hours,” she said. “All we asked was for her to get her hands through her count so that David[Stevens]could do it. We asked her to help us with that.” It makes this strange that is even a problem.”
She also said the Attorney General was “trying to play a political game. Their threat was mild. I think this is a litigious society and they are trying to target us.”
“I’m doing what my heart tells me to do. I wasn’t just going after Tom. I wanted to do a hand count because voters wanted it. , it turned into this huge one.Thank you for the opportunity to answer.
“Crosby and Stevens have worked together on this.”
She said she trusted Stevens to faithfully carry out his election duties and that he would hire a new director and another staff member. He told her so.
“He will be fair,” she said. “He’s not political. He’s currently the interim overseer of the election, which makes a lot of sense to me.”
She was happy to be able to refer people to him about election issues and not have to answer those questions.
“It’s a relief. Now people with far right or far left views can call him,” Judd said.
In response to the Attorney General’s Office regarding the Marla lawsuit, Crosby shared an email sent to director Timothy Mattix, stating: is not allowed. “
In response to Makar’s complaint about Crosby’s off-topic comments at the April 5 meeting, he said: Synonymous with “transmission”. So it was they who were talking about something off the agenda. “
