Leer en español
By court order, the Cochise County Board of Supervisors confirmed the results of Thursday’s election, 2-0.
The vote meant that all Arizona counties agreed to send their results to the Office of the Secretary of State, ending weeks of election drama unfolding from counties in southeastern Arizona. rice field.
Since October, two Republican overseers on the board have questioned the reliability of the vote-counting machines. Their actions ended in a series of legal battles, and on Thursday, a judge ordered them to investigate the election results and deliver the results to the Arizona Secretary of State by 5 p.m.
The Office of the Secretary of State confirmed Thursday evening that it had received Cochise certification that would allow it to proceed with the statewide canvas scheduled for 10 a.m. Monday.Canvas officially declares the winner of the November election. and will begin work on the three automatic recounts required by law.
Supervisor Tom Crosby did not attend a board meeting ordered by Pima County Superior Court Judge Casey McGinley, although Crosby was present two hours earlier for a court hearing. told the board that he stayed away on the advice of the board’s newly hired attorney.
Crosby, along with supervisor Peggy Judd, ignored repeated legal advice that their actions were illegal, forcing the board to seek outside counsel to represent them.
“I don’t like being threatened,” Judd said before voting for certification. I was relieved it wasn’t. But defying a court order risked contempt.
Judd defended his actions, saying it was important to ensure the election was “fair and good”, and was reluctant to issue a motion to prove the results. Instead, she turned to Ann English, chairman of the board and a Democrat who opposes her colleague’s move.
“The fight wasn’t over. I couldn’t even move,” said Judd.
The vote came after an hour-long court hearing in which McGinley ordered the board to call a meeting on Thursday afternoon to review the election results.
He reprimanded the board for failing to meet its obligation to do so earlier this week.
McGinley refused Crosby’s request that the hearing continue until Tuesday so that a commission attorney hired two hours before the hearing could “quickly respond.”
“The board is beyond its legal authority,” McGinley said, adding that the law “clearly requires” a vote within 20 days after the election. was.
He said there is only one exception to that deadline: if the vote has not taken place or is still being tallied. That was not the case in Cochise County, he said.
McGinley isn’t new to Cochise’s election troubles. On November 7, he ruled that the board had violated the law by pursuing his count of 100% of all votes cast in the November 8 election.
Crosby and Judd at Thursday’s hearing relied on claims that more information is needed about whether vote tallying machines are certified by an accredited laboratory. Set up a Friday meeting to investigate and then review the findings.
English said in court that the visitation was a tactic to delay certification and spread election conspiracy theories.
An attorney for the Arizona Alliance of Retired Americans said Judd’s comments to the New York Times earlier this week underscored this point. Judd said the machine’s complaints were an excuse to hide their real concerns about the Maricopa County Election Day issue.
English called Friday’s scheduled meeting “a sort of skirmish between the secretary of state and election naysayers”, citing an agenda put forward by Crosby. said.
English called the scheme “a circus that doesn’t need to happen. I’ve had enough. The public has had enough.”
A few hours ago, the board held an emergency meeting and hired attorney Daniel McAuley by a two-to-one vote. However, McCauley will not appear in court and will have to familiarize himself with the matter until at least Tuesday, he told his supervisor.
English voted against the lawsuit, saying it was “too little and too late” to hire a lawyer so close to the hearing who was unfamiliar with the case.
She previously hoped to obtain legal representation, but being so late in hiring an attorney essentially just allows the attorney to go to court and ask for continuation, He said it was not in the county’s best interest.
Judd voted “Yes” to hiring a lawyer, saying, “I can’t speak. It hurts. But yeah. I’m fine with it. I think it’s better than nothing.” I’m sorry, we got along pretty well, and when Mr. Brem was away, it was hard to try to figure it out.”
The regulator voted Tuesday to hire attorney Brian Brem to defend them and the county government against two lawsuits. On Wednesday, they were stuck when Brem turned down the offer, as did another attorney he recommended.
When McGinley considered a request from Secretary of State Katie Hobbs and a group of retirees, the three supervisors appeared in Bisbee’s courtroom and ordered them to certify the election results to the board. Due to this, Monday was the deadline. However, by a 2-1 vote, the board decided to postpone the decision until the weekend.
“This madness must stop”:‘This madness must stop’: Former prosecutor recommends indicting Cochise County supervisor
McAuley, the board’s emergency legal employer, was not in court, but filed a motion to move the case from state court to federal court. The motion came after McGinley ended the hearing and asked for his 15-minute break to allow him to ponder his decision.
This motion was not taken up. Even so, it would have shown that it was not possible.We wanted to move the case to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arizona.There is no such court.
The drama that was drawn has also resulted in another late claim that is likely to be dismissed as authentication has taken place.
On Wednesday, the county was hit with a claim seeking $25,000 in damages for the commission’s failure to certify. Cochise County resident Paul Sibertsen said the board rejected his vote and could not prove he was disqualified as a voter.
Hobbs said the county’s 47,000 votes won’t count if Cochise doesn’t turn in the proof in time for Monday’s statewide canvas.
Sivertsen said in a news release that he is seeking compensation because he believes fines are the only way to prevent “future anti-democratic and illegal schemes.”
He also suggested that the allegations could be the first salvo to try to file a class action lawsuit.
Please contact the reporter at maryjo.pitzl@arizonarepublic.com follow her on twitter @maryjpitzl.
Support local journalism. Register now on azcentral.com.
