Peggy Judd | Arizona Capitol Times
Your Inside Source for Arizona Government, Politics and Business
Fri, 20 Dec 2024 20:14:03 +0000
en-US
hourly
1
/files/2023/05/az17.jpg
Peggy Judd | Arizona Capitol Times
32
32
43761567
Peggy Judd: Just here to do her job
/news/2024/12/20/peggy-judd-just-here-to-do-her-job/
Fri, 20 Dec 2024 20:14:03 +0000
/?p=492465
As she reflects now on her career, Judd said she never wanted to be political, she just wanted to do her job.
The post Peggy Judd: Just here to do her job first appeared on Arizona Capitol Times.]]>
Peggy Judd is done. She sat on her last meeting of the Board of Supervisors earlier this month. She took a plea deal, putting an end to two hovering felony charges lodged against her for failing to certify the 2022 election. She leaves with around $70,000 in legal fees and a long legacy of public service.
As she reflects now on her career, Judd said she never wanted to be political, she just wanted to do her job.
How did you first get involved in public service?
I got invited to apply to be on the Parks and Recreation organization in our community, and that was the first time I’d really gone to board meetings and tried to get things done. We got Keiller Park – our main park where the swimming pool is, and the big ramada and all of our events are – we got that completely remodeled, and I got my name on a big stone plaque with all the other board members.
And from that, our president was in charge of Rex Allen Days. And Rex Allen Days brings about 20,000 people into Willcox. Rex Allen was a great music star, a silver screen cowboy. We’re particularly close to their family because my dad was really good friends with Rex Allen. I helped on that committee. I took care of all the vendors, got people to perform at the park and all those things. And then I ended up being the president of Rex Allen Days … It’s a big festival with a rodeo and a parade and everything, so it was quite something.
I wasn’t political. I was just really busy. I had my kids, and I volunteered at school, I went on every field trip. I did everything. I did everything, and loved it. And so I was really that kind of a person anyway.
When did you become more political?
One day, I had this lady come in. She and her husband had a little group called the Old Time Fiddlers in Willcox. Every year they performed for us at Keiller Park. And so she came in, she sat down, and she said, “Peggy, I’m so worried about our country. It seems like everything’s going wrong.” She says, “I’m just really upset. And my kids won’t talk to me about it anymore. Will you talk to me? I’m just so worried.”
I had heard of this thing called the Tea Party. And so I said, “Why don’t I have a tea party, and we’ll let people come and bring signs and talk about the government, and talk about what they’re experiencing.”
So we had our first tea party. Now I didn’t know what a Tea Party was, I had to call Representative Griffin. At the time, she was the party chairman for the GOP in our county … this was my first political thing. And Representative Griffin said you have to invite both political parties, and I barely could get any Democrats to come. Every now and then a couple of interested ones would come … and they would say, “Oh, that wasn’t so bad.”
We had open mic time, and everybody talked. And I really did think it was important. It made me feel good. But I couldn’t make it non-partisan. I couldn’t make it be a balance, because we’re like, 80% Republican in Willcox. It was very one sided.
What led you to the Legislature?
Whenever Representative Griffin was trying to get someone to run for Senate, she was looking around our district, she thought of me, and I was like, “Oh, geez. Give me a couple of days to pray about this because this is not something I ever thought of in my future.”
I said no. And she goes, “Well, you know what? I think I’ll just run then, and then you can come up to the Legislature and shadow me and learn what it’s about, and then maybe in the future, you can run for Legislature.” So I just went on about my merry business.
For Mother’s Day, I was camping in San Diego. I was on the beach. I had my stupid little flip phone – I should have left it at camp – and I’m reading, and my toes are in the sand, like they’re supposed to be. I was against this rock, which was soft, actually, I was comfortable, and I got a phone call.
It was Representative Griffin, and she said, the lady who was going to run for House of Representatives cannot run. Her husband got sick. She cannot run. So I need you to do it. How do you feel on the beach? Because it’s like the whole world is my oyster. So I said, Sure, I’ll do it.
What was your experience like in the Legislature?
I really loved being a representative. I loved that part, and because my district was about half Democrat and half Republican, I was very respectful of that … I’m a representative, not just a tool of the party.
I have wonderful, wonderful stories and experiences and memories, and made friends with a lot of people, including the governor (Katie Hobbs). She was right across the hall from me. Her kids sold Girl Scout cookies. I always bought Girl Scout cookies.
Then, I needed support … A band teacher had abused me, like I was like a victim of sexual abuse when I was 10 and 11, and I really wanted to fix that.
I had for the third time called the State Department of Education, and they’re like “Oh this guy, he’s teaching over here in this district, and he’s still a band teacher, and he’s still doing this and that.” And I was just so mad, and I needed to do something. And finally, a person at the state called me back, they asked me a bunch of questions, and then they said. “I think you need to just take it to your police department.” But they said forget it, the statute of limitations ran out.
I worked on it every way I could at home, with my school. I worked everywhere I could, and they just got mad at me. And it ended up being ugly, like stupid, ugly. So, when I was in the Legislature, and I’m like, gosh, I can get on this bandwagon, and I can work on this. But the perfect partner for something like that was Katie, because that’s what she did. That was her job (social worker).
I knew Katie was a partner in all those kind of things. And because I had half Democrats in my district, we became really good friends. And if you asked her right now, she would say that we’re really good friends still. I needed her, and we needed each other. And we were both brand new in the Legislature, and we just became friends.
What brought you back to Cochise County?
I was out for a while, and then I got a call from my county chairman. He said you could pick representative or supervisor, but we want you to run for something. So I picked supervisor so I could stay home, and it was more money, and it was four years instead of just two.
Fast forward a lot of years, I am there. I’m in my second term. I’m wanting – because some constituents needed me to show them – that I did and I do care about election integrity. Everybody does, no matter what party you’re in. So when this election stuff came up, honestly, I said, there is one thing I can do … we can hand count the ballots.
The next day, we got a letter from the secretary of state, from Katie, and she said, you need to follow the law.
What was your view on elections at the time?
I was telling everyone in the meetings everywhere, our elections are fine. These people that call themselves, we the people, for whatever reason, really want to see that for themselves, to experience that. I don’t think this is gonna hurt anything.
It wasn’t to change anything or create something out of nothing. It was to show those people that we have good elections, that our machines work. We have a good system. I talked to my IT people. I said, “You know, they’re saying that it could be broken into, it could be hacked,” And they said, “Not with what we’re doing.” It was very protected. It was very fine. I can’t say we had problems in our elections. I had watched them very closely. For several years I had already certified them. So literally, this was just about a simple hand count of as many ballots as we could, limited by what the secretary of state said. And it became ugly and stupid.
What was the aftermath of the court-ordered vote to certify?
The people that liked me and were supporting me so loudly started hating me. And it never got better. Then, I was getting hate from everyone, the Democrats and the Republicans, and that was ugly.
What have been some milestones since taking the plea deal?
I made up with Kris Mayes … I told her I don’t have any hard feelings … She goes, Peggy, I need you to know this isn’t personal.
It was pretty personal to me. I was struggling all year long with my husband dying of cancer. And then I lost him, and it was pretty hard for me, and I still have this huge bill, but I said I understand. And I don’t fault you for it … it was kind of neat. I feel better. I feel lighter.
I did tell Katie, now that my case is over, I need to call her and come see her. She needs to get my side of the story. It’ll be so much easier now that I’m not indicted anymore.
Would you consider running for office again?
I might do public office. I doubt I would do the Legislature. I really need to be in something that’s not political … I’m not political. I’m just here to do my job. The post Peggy Judd: Just here to do her job first appeared on Arizona Capitol Times.]]>
492465
Cochise County supervisor pleas guilty for delaying 2022 election certification
/news/2024/10/21/cochise-county-supervisor-peggy-judd-at-a-public-meeting-on-thursday-dec-1-2022-in-sierra-vista-arizona-mark-levy-pool-photo-via-ap-file/
Mon, 21 Oct 2024 22:28:43 +0000
/?p=491520
Cochise County Supervisor Peggy Judd pled guilty to a single misdemeanor for delaying certification of the 2022 election and avoided felony charges as part of a plea deal extended by […]
The post Cochise County supervisor pleas guilty for delaying 2022 election certification first appeared on Arizona Capitol Times.]]>
Cochise County Supervisor Peggy Judd pled guilty to a single misdemeanor for delaying certification of the 2022 election and avoided felony charges as part of a plea deal extended by the Attorney General’s office.
Per the agreement entered Monday, the Attorney General’s office said Judd acknowledged her failure to canvass the 2022 election in line with state law. She initially faced two felony charges for conspiracy and interference with an election officer, carrying a sentence ranging from six months to two and a half years. She is now held to a $500 fine and 90 days of unsupervised probation, starting today.
Judd is not seeking reelection, and her term is set to expire in January. Her probationary period spans the upcoming election, creating a type of assurance for a timely certification and canvass in 2024, according to the Attorney General’s office.
“Any attempt to interfere with elections in Arizona will not be tolerated. My office will continue to pursue justice and ensure that anyone who undermines our electoral system is held accountable,” Attorney General Kris Mayes said in a statement. “Today’s plea agreement and sentencing should serve as a strong reminder that I will not hesitate to use every tool available to uphold the rule of law and protect the integrity of Arizona’s elections.”
Judd and Supervisor Tom Crosby delayed canvassing the 2022 election, pushing past the state deadline and necessitating a court order compelling the board to meet and certify on Dec. 1, 2022. Judd and then-chair Ann English met the same day and voted to certify the election. Crosby did not show.
In November 2023, the state grand jury indicted Judd and Crosby on two class five felony counts for conspiracy and interference with an election officer for their delay in certifying the election.
Wilenchik later moved to dismiss the charges against Crosby as a matter of law, claiming Crosby and Judd’s actions were covered by legislative immunity. Judd joined, and her attorney Kurt Altman filed a separate motion to dismiss, claiming the grand jury lacked the statutory authority to levy the charges in the first place.
Judge Geoffrey Fish rejected both motions in June, finding the two were not covered by legislative immunity and declined to dismiss the charges on all fronts, clearing the way for the case to go to trial.
In September, the state then continued the last day of the case, pushing the start of any trial into early 2025.
On Oct. 14, Fish set a status conference to discuss a potential change of plea for Judd. And on Monday, Judd pleaded guilty to a class 3 misdemeanor for failure or refusal to perform duty by an election officer.
“It’s the best path forward because it puts it behind her,” Altman said. “It’s done. This whole ordeal.”
As part of the plea deal, Judd was placed on 90 days of unsupervised probation, which essentially requires she not break the law, and pay $500 to the Attorney General’s Anti-Racketeering Fund.
Though Judd agreed to the deal, Altman said he thought the charges to be unwarranted in the first place.
“There was no interference with an election officer, there was no conspiracy,” Altman said. “The law said she had to certify by the 28th and she didn’t. That wasn’t a conspiracy. It didn’t interfere with anybody. The Secretary of State was able to do what she had to do. The original charges were a little overblown.”
Judd’s exit from the criminal case now leaves supervisor Tom Crosby in his continued fight against two felony charges.
Dennis Wilenchik, attorney for Crosby, said they had not yet reached a plea deal with the Attorney General’s office, nor had the office extended the same deal as given to Judd.
“I don’t anticipate any deal being reached at this time and look forward to Mayes proving her ridiculous charges at trial,” Wilenchik said.
Wilenchik shared a similar sentiment with Altman, noting “No election officer was interfered with and the certification by the state was done as scheduled.”
He continued, “Tom Crosby is a caring public official looking out for the legitimate interests of the public and who did not intend to nor did he violate any criminal law.”
Unlike Judd, Crosby is seeking reelection to the board of supervisors and is set to face Democrat Theresa Jane Walsh for the district one seat in November. If he is convicted while in office, though, he would be removed, per state law.
A trial assignment date is scheduled for Jan. 30.The post Cochise County supervisor pleas guilty for delaying 2022 election certification first appeared on Arizona Capitol Times.]]>
491520
Inside the private pressure campaign to force hand-counting of Arizona ballots
/news/2024/07/16/inside-the-private-pressure-campaign-to-force-hand-counting-of-arizona-ballots/
Tue, 16 Jul 2024 21:48:34 +0000
Republican lawmakers in Arizona privately pressured county leaders across the state to count ballots by hand instead of using machines, according to previously unreported text messages.
The post Inside the private pressure campaign to force hand-counting of Arizona ballots first appeared on Arizona Capitol Times.]]>
This article was originally published by Votebeat, a nonprofit news organization covering local election administration and voting access.
Republican lawmakers in Arizona privately pressured county leaders across the state to count ballots by hand instead of using machines, according to previously unreported text messages.
The messages, obtained by Votebeat through public record requests, are a window into how state lawmakers are trying to leverage relationships with Republican county supervisors— who decide how to count ballots in their counties — to promote a practice that state officials have repeatedly said would be illegal.
And it highlights how lawmakers have turned to counties to try to change how ballots are counted after failing to change state laws.
In Mohave County, for example, messages show that Supervisor Travis Lingenfelter requested a vote on hand-counting ballots during the upcoming presidential election after state Sen. Sonny Borrelli, a fellow Republican who lives in the county, connected him with a lawyer who promised to represent the board free if necessary.
Sen. Sonny Borrelli, R-Lake Havasu City
After Lingenfelter spoke to the lawyer, Borrelli checked back in. “When will you put this on the agenda for a vote,” Borrelli texted Lingenfelter. Lingenfelter replied with a screenshot of a meeting agenda for the next week, showing a scheduled vote.
In Pinal County, the day supervisors discussed hand-counting ballots in this year’s election, state Sen. Wendy Rogers, a Republican who represents parts of Pinal County, texted Supervisor Kevin Cavanaugh, also a Republican, to assert that hand-counting all ballots was legal — something the Secretary of State’s Office and state Attorney General’s Office have said is not true.
“Don’t let them lie today,” Rogers wrote.
Supervisors ultimately rejected their pleas. So far, all Arizona counties plan to use machines to count ballots for the upcoming election. The supervisors in Pinal and Mohave, specifically, decided against a hand count after the counties’ lawyers told them they would potentially be violating state law and could be held personally liable if they went ahead with it.
Sen. Wendy Rogers, R-Flagstaff
Adding heft to the warnings: Two Republican supervisors in Cochise County, Peggy Judd and Tom Crosby, are facing felony charges for allegedly conspiring to interfere with the county’s midterm election — in part by pushing for a full hand count of ballots.
Other newly obtained text messages from Cochise County, which American Oversight fought for in court and shared with Votebeat, show that a state senator was trying to pressure Judd during the public meeting when the supervisors held the key vote on hand-counting ballots.
State Sen. David Gowan, who lives in Cochise County, texted Judd just as the meeting began, appearing to pass along a message from another Republican, then-Senate President Karen Fann.
“Does the Cochise bos know there is no law prohibiting them from hand count? From President Fann,” he wrote, referring to the board of supervisors.
Votebeat attempted to contact every public official identified in this article, and included comments from those who responded.
Push for hand counts persists despite known drawbacks
The issue with hand counting ballots is not just the law. Multiple studies, trials, and attempts to hand-count ballots across the country – including in Pinal and Mohave counties – have proven that hand-counting instead of using machines would cost more money, require hundreds to thousands more workers, lead to inaccurate results, and potentially delay or disrupt the certification of results. Yet the conversations about instituting hand counts continue in Arizona, especially as many of the county supervisors run for re-election this year.
Cavanaugh, who is running for sheriff in Pinal County, says he still thinks Pinal should expand its post-election hand-count audit, and he believes the board still might hand-count.
Ron Gould
In Mohave County, Supervisor Ron Gould, who is vying to keep his seat on the board, sued Attorney General Kris Mayes, asking the court to rule on whether counties are required to use machines during the initial count of ballots. A hearing date hasn’t been set.
Many election lawyers have said state law is unclear on whether counties must use machines for the initial ballot count, but Secretary of State Adrian Fontes and Mayes, both Democrats, have said machines are legally required. In October, the Arizona Court of Appeals ruled that counties cannot legally hand-count all ballots during their statutorily required post-election audit, but that ruling did not appear to directly address whether machines must be used during the initial vote count.
Gould has said he believes Mohave County’s current board would move forward with eliminating machines if a court deems it legal.
Senator texts Cochise supervisor: ‘Watching online right now’
The pressure campaign for hand counts has accelerated this year, but it began after former President Donald Trump began claiming falsely, and without evidence, that someone programmed machines to switch votes to President Joe Biden during the 2020 presidential race.
Multiple courts in Arizona and across the country dismissed the claims. Election officials have procedures and protections to verify machines are working properly.
Voters in most Arizona counties vote by hand-marking paper ballots that are then fed into scanners that tally the votes. The results of the machine count are verified by a manual audit of the paper ballots in a select number of races before the county’s results are finalized. If enough mistakes are found, by law, the county must continue to hand-count the votes on more ballots until the results are confirmed.
Just before the 2022 midterm election, a grassroots group led in part by Corporation Commissioner Jim O’Connor, a Republican, bombarded county supervisors’ email inboxes and filled the seats in county boardrooms with a call to stop using the counting machines.
From left are Cochise County Supervisors Tom Crosby and Peggy Judd
Only Cochise County listened, and even there, the two Republicans on the three-member board — Judd and Crosby — wanted to keep using the machines for the initial count, but subsequently confirm those results with a full hand count.
On Oct. 12, the day after the supervisors discussed a hand count, Republican state Rep. Lupe Diaz texted Judd to assert that the law allowed supervisors to use the post-election audit to hand-count all ballots.
“There is nothing preventing 100% hand counts,” Diaz texted her.
Judd put the proposal on the agenda for an Oct. 24 special meeting of supervisors.
The meeting began at 2 p.m. At 2:34 p.m., Gowan texted Judd the message about Fann. A minute later, he texted her to say he had just spoken to the office of then-Attorney General Mark Brnovich, a Republican, and there’s “nothing that can stop a hand count in law.”
Sen. David Gowan
An hour later, as the meeting continued, Gowan texted Judd again. “There are so many in the Senate, who support you guys on the hand count,” he wrote. “Just want you to know, many of them are watching online right now.”
Judd, who used a flip phone at the time, said she didn’t immediately see the messages. “I had stopped reading any emails during that hectic time,” she said.
She also said it “wouldn’t have mattered anyway” and she was influenced by constituents.
She and Crosby voted that day to expand the county’s hand-count audit to look at more ballots than required by law. The motion they voted on was confusing, and many, including the Secretary of State’s Office, interpreted it as a vote for a full hand count.
In 2023, Mayes replaced Brnovich as attorney general and opened an investigation into that vote, as well as Judd and Crosby’s later efforts to delay the certification of the county’s election results. A grand jury concluded Crosby and Judd’s actions were a conspiracy and interference with an election, both felonies.
Crosby and Judd have pleaded not guilty. They are awaiting trial.
Texts show state lawmakers’ private requests to Mohave supervisors
Last summer, before the Cochise indictments, and as county election officials were starting their initial planning for the presidential election cycle, state Sens. Borrelli and Rogers toured the state to try to convince county supervisors to get rid of voting machines for this year’s election.
That included lobbying in Mohave County, where Borrelli lives and where he is now challenging Supervisor Buster Johnson for his seat in the July 30 Republican primary.
After Votebeat in January requested Mohave supervisors’ text messages related to hand-counting ballots, which the county is required to provide under state public records laws, the county attorney’s office said it asked supervisors to conduct a search of their own phones and provide any responsive records. The county attorney’s office did not independently conduct a search.
Travis Lingenfelter
Initially, only Johnson provided records. After Votebeat pressed for more, Supervisor Hildy Angius also handed over messages. The law firm Ballard Spahr then sent letters on Votebeat’s behalf, demanding that the other supervisors respond to the request as required by law.
Gould and Lingenfelter then handed over text messages as well. Only Supervisor Jean Bishop, who voted against hand-counting, did not provide any messages in response to the request. She told Votebeat she didn’t have any text message discussions about hand-counting ballots.
The texts provided from Gould’s and Lingenfelter’s phones give a fuller picture of Borelli’s efforts there.
In early June 2023, Borrelli and Rogers went to a supervisors meeting and told the supervisors to vote to get rid of their voting machines on the grounds that they were insecure — though they didn’t offer evidence — and that the state Legislature had passed a nonbinding resolution banning their use. All supervisors except Bishop voted to have the elections director suggest a plan to move forward with hand-counting.
That included Johnson. But in group texts he was included in after the meeting, his own staff members mocked the idea.
“So did they vote to hand count???” one staff member asked.
“No to make a plan to hand count,” someone else replied.
“Oh for crying out loud,” the staff member responded.
On June 23, in a group chat, another member of Johnson’s staff wrote that “statistically hand counting is not possible … there is no logical way we can hand count the primary and general within the 14 day canvas[s] deadline.”
Another replied: “ha ha, well of course it won’t work, like going back to dial up internet.”
Asked why he voted for the plan if he didn’t support the idea, Johnson said he believed the board was going to vote to hand-count ballots. “The only way I could stop it was to suggest we have Allen come back with the cost associated with doing the hand count,” he said, referring to elections director Allen Tempert. “That would give time for the board members to think about what they were doing.”
Johnson said that he has publicly explained his reasons for not supporting hand-counting ballots, including a lack of problems with the current system, trust in the county elections director, cost, and the added time it would take.
If Republican state lawmakers wanted it to happen, he pointed out, they could have changed the law in 2022, when they had a majority in the Legislature and a Republican governor.
“We are an arm of the state,” he said. “We can only do what the state allows us to do.”
In August, Tempert presented his findings to the supervisors. He said a hand count of the 2024 election would cost the county more than $1 million, and require hundreds of workers and many weeks. Supervisors voted against the plan. Lingenfelter cast the deciding vote, saying it would be too costly.
Borrelli kept at it, though. In early November, he texted Lingenfelter and told him lawyer Bryan Blehm would be calling him.
“He’s the Attorney that will defend the County if it’s sued because of the hand count. ‘At no cost’ to the County,” he wrote.
After Lingenfelter and Blehm spoke, on Nov. 17, Lingenfelter texted Borrelli to confirm the vote would be on the Nov. 20 agenda. After Lingenfelter confirmed it, Borrelli sent him a smiley-face emoji with sunglasses.
That day, Votebeat published a story about the upcoming vote. That weekend, Mayes’ office sent a letter to Mohave supervisors warning them it would be illegal.
Lingenfelter sent Borrelli that article, as well as a related article in which Pinal County Attorney Kent Volkmer warned that Mayes could file criminal charges if supervisors moved forward.
“Criminal charges?” Lingenfelter texted Borrelli.
“That’s bullshit,” Borrelli texted back.
That day, Borrelli also texted Gould. “Please make the motion to approve,” he wrote. “And request a roll call vote.”
“I will,” Gould replied.
At the meeting, Lingenfelter again cast the deciding “no” vote against hand-counting.
Less than two weeks later, Mayes announced the indictments against the two Cochise supervisors.
In an interview, Lingenfelter said he had previously promised Borrelli he would put hand-counting back on the agenda if Borrelli found a lawyer who would make sure supervisors wouldn’t have to use taxpayer dollars for any legal costs associated with the effort.
He added that he ultimately voted no only because of Mayes’ threat to bring felony charges against supervisors personally, which he called “shocking.” If a court ultimately rules that hand-counting is legal, Lingenfelter said, he would vote in favor of using the method if that’s what most of his constituents want.
Johnson said he doesn’t know whether the county is done considering hand-counting.
“I guess it all depends on the results of the election,” he said. “When the election didn’t go the way people thought it should have, that’s when the problems came up.”
Pinal supervisors heed county attorney’s warning
Borrelli and Rogers had also tried to convince Pinal County’s supervisors to move forward with hand-counting. But just before the indictments, after the warning from the county attorney, they also rejected it.
At the request of the supervisors, the county’s election director began a hand-count trial in June 2023 using test ballots and found that each batch of 25 ballots was taking a team of workers about 87 minutes to count, or about 3.5 minutes a ballot.
In August, Borrelli and Rogers visited the supervisors and urged them to move forward.
Supervisor Mike Goodman’s office staff texted him before the meeting that they supported the idea. “Be bold boss! Hand count! Hand count! Hand count!” one said. “I say we stand up, stand out & lead on!!” another wrote.
The supervisors didn’t take action at that meeting. But months later they put an item on a Nov. 15 meeting agenda to discuss it again. That was when Rogers texted Cavanaugh and told him “don’t let them lie” about whether it was legal.
“By law, a 100% hand count can be done!” she wrote.
Cavanaugh texted her back. “I could not get any bos member to budge toward hand counts with volkmer talking grand jury indictments and pointing to ruling from appelate court,” he wrote.
Asked if Rogers influenced his thoughts on the topic, Cavanaugh said no. He said that he believes he and Rogers have a similar way of thinking, in that they are concerned about elections, but he also has to follow the law.
“I’m more cautious than a lot of people,” he said. “I try to base everything in law. So while I definitely support hand-counting, we have to do it in a way that is consistent with what the legislature has written and what the governor signed.”
Cavanaugh said that if it turns out to be legal to count votes by hand, and they can figure out a way to hand-count “accurately and speedily” then he is OK with it.
“I don’t think the issue is dead,” he said.
Jen Fifield is a reporter for Votebeat based in Arizona. Contact Jen at jfifield@votebeat.org.The post Inside the private pressure campaign to force hand-counting of Arizona ballots first appeared on Arizona Capitol Times.]]>
489776
Attorney: Indicted Cochise County supervisors to challenge adverse court ruling
/news/2024/06/19/attorney-indicted-cochise-county-supervisors-to-challenge-adverse-court-ruling/
Wed, 19 Jun 2024 07:01:53 +0000
Cochise County Supervisors Peggy Judd and Tom Crosby’s attempts to see two felony charges for allegedly delaying the canvass of the 2022 election dismissed or returned to the grand jury failed, a judge ruled Tuesday, pushing the case closer to trial.
The post Attorney: Indicted Cochise County supervisors to challenge adverse court ruling first appeared on Arizona Capitol Times.]]>
Cochise County Supervisors Peggy Judd and Tom Crosby’s attempts to see two felony charges for allegedly delaying the canvass of the 2022 election dismissed or returned to the grand jury failed, a judge ruled Tuesday, pushing the case closer to trial.
Maricopa County Superior Court judge Geoffrey Fish rejected claims of legislative immunity, and ruled the Cochise County Board of Supervisors, “or any other county board of supervisors, does not have the authority to delay the canvass with the single exception being where returns from a polling place are found to be missing, a situation not found here.”
“Canvassing the vote is not a discretionary function,” Fish wrote.
Crosby and Judd both face two class five felonies for conspiracy and interference with an election officer after the two delayed certifying the 2022 election until ordered by the court.
Crosby moved to dismiss the charges as a matter of law after arguing the decision to delay the election canvass vote was covered by legislative immunity. But Fish found the canvass is not a legislative act, but a nondiscretionary administrative duty required by law.
He concluded Crosby’s reasoning for delay, an attempt to set up a hearing on the legitimacy of tabulation machines with the Secretary of State and his subject matter experts, to be “secondary and not relevant to the requirement the vote be canvassed and transmitted.”
Fish further addressed Crosby’s additional challenges to the definition of “any election” in the criminal statute, a claim that the charging statute should be void for vagueness and an alleged lack of interference with the statewide canvass.
He concluded prior case law supported a definition of “election” to include canvassing of the votes and found the statute gives election officials notice of what is criminal conduct. And he added that in this case, the supervisors had “specific notice” and were “warned by multiple parties, including the county attorney, the local elections officials and state election officials that a failure to canvass the votes by the deadline would not only be a violation of their responsibilities but would violate the law.”
Whether the supervisors’ actions materially interfered with the canvass is to be left up to the jury, Fish ruled.
In Judd’s motion to dismiss, her attorney, Kurt Altman, contended the grand jury lacked the statutory authority to investigate and charge the Cochise County supervisors, warranting the dismissal of the two felony charges.
But the Attorney General’s Office claimed the case fit squarely under a provision in statute allowing the grand jury to take up “any form of intentional, knowing or corrupt misconduct involving any person compensated by public funds.”
Fish found there was “no question both defendants are compensated by public funds” and the allegations from the state that Crosby and Judd “knowingly acted to interfere with an election officer in the discharge of duties and knowingly conspired to do so… could constitute ‘misconduct.’”
The supervisors motions to remand the proceedings to the grand jury failed, too. Crosby claimed the state failed to provide the grand jury with the full and applicable law, advanced improper evidence that should have been protected by legislative privilege and claimed Cochise County Attorney Brian McIntyre presented privileged and misleading testimony.
Fish found attorneys for the state read the proper statutes to the grand jury. And he rejected the claim that certain evidence should have been protected by legislative privilege as the canvass is a “ministerial duty” and because Crosby “voluntarily presented his own evidence to support his testimony, which included attorney letters, Cochise County meeting minutes and other communications.”
Fish further found McIntyre’s testimony was not misleading and did not rely on information guarded by attorney/client privilege given the statements McIntyre referenced were made during open board meetings and work sessions.
Judd, meanwhile, asked for remand based on an alleged failure to properly instruct the grand jury on Fifth Amendment Rights.
The state advised Judd that she had a “constitutional right to refuse to answer any question if a truthful answer to the question would tend to incriminate you.”
Altman claimed the advisory was improper as “the State left the impression that if Defendant would answer questions truthfully, they would tend to incriminate her.”
But Fish noted Judd invoked the Fifth on “mundane questions,” indicating a “blanket invocation, as was her right, and therefore the grand jurors were not left with certain questions answered while others were not.”
He rejected her legislative privilege claim on the same grounds and rejected a similar claim of misleading testimony by McIntyre.
Crosby’s attorney, Dennis Wilenchik, said he was going to attempt to file a special action with the Arizona Supreme Court to challenge the superior court’s ruling in hopes of avoiding “the need for a costly and wasteful trial in the interim.”
“If we have to try this case I am still confident a jury would acquit Mr. Crosby, and Ms. Judd as well, because there is no conspiracy to commit any crime, there was no intent to commit any crime,” Wilenchik said in a written statement, “This is nothing but another political witch hunt of our current Attorney General trying to settle political scores, and wasting the taxpayer dollars doing so using the court system and its processes, and we will not give up until justice is done and our client acquitted.”
In a written statement, Mayes said, “This is a serious case, and the charges have merit. Today’s ruling by the court supports that. While the defendants are innocent until proven guilty, as are all defendants in our criminal justice system, my office is prepared to move forward with this case and pursue justice for the people of Arizona.”
Altman did not respond to a request for comment.
The case now heads to trial, with a complex case management conference set for June 26. The post Attorney: Indicted Cochise County supervisors to challenge adverse court ruling first appeared on Arizona Capitol Times.]]>
489578
Retaliation or criminal conspiracy? Attorneys for indicted Cochise County supervisors aim to toss case
/news/2024/04/20/retaliation-or-criminal-conspiracy-attorneys-for-indicted-cochise-county-supervisors-aim-to-toss-case/
Sun, 21 Apr 2024 03:52:17 +0000
Attorneys for two Cochise County supervisors facing criminal charges lashed out Friday in a hearing at Attorney General Kris Mayes for indicting them in the first place.
The post Retaliation or criminal conspiracy? Attorneys for indicted Cochise County supervisors aim to toss case first appeared on Arizona Capitol Times.]]>
Attorneys for two Cochise County supervisors facing criminal charges lashed out Friday in a hearing at Attorney General Kris Mayes for indicting them in the first place.
Dennis Wilenchik who represents Tom Crosby called the move “vindictive and in retribution” because his client and Peggy Judd, both Republicans, said they had the right to get some questions answered before they certified the results of the 2022 election. He said the indictment was “based on a broad reading of the statute that was never written that way or intended that way.”
“What we have here is a rogue prosecutor and a rogue prosecution,” Wilenchik said, who was seeking to read into the motives of the pair who voted to delay formal certification.
Kurt Altman, who represents Judd, told Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Geoffrey Fish that the pair are facing criminal charges that could send them to prison for up to 2 1/2 years simply because they voted to table a motion to delay certification. That he said was their right.
“They’ve been indicted in this case on an absolute legislative function,” he said.
But Assistant Attorney General Todd Lawson said this involves more than the vote by the pair – with Democrat Ann English dissenting – to delay the certification on Nov. 30, 2022.
“This is an overall conspiracy, a larger plan,” he said, including an effort to force a hand count of all the ballots and even a lawsuit filed against Lisa Marra who was the county’s elections director.
That all started in October, Lawson said in the hearing to determine whether to throw out the case or send it back to the grand jury. He said efforts by defense attorneys to say this is just about the vote itself, which may or may not be protected by legislative immunity, “ignores the totality of the entire conspiracy.”
But regardless of the often-overheated rhetoric, the question of whether the supervisors will have to go on trial next month could depend on a simple question: Do they, as elected officials, have authority to examine and question the results? Or do they just have to accept them without question?
And how Fish answers that question could have statewide impact, determining for the future how much power county supervisors have to raise what they believe are legitimate issues that could affect the accuracy of the results.
A few facts are clear.
Arizona law requires that supervisors in each county do a formal “canvass” of votes within 20 days after the election. That deadline in 2022 was Nov. 28.
That vote in Cochise County got postponed until Nov. 30 because Crosby wanted to question both Katie Hobbs, who was the secretary of state at the time, and election doubters about whether the machines used to tally votes had been properly certified.
But the meeting notice that day included only the canvass and not the examination the Republicans wanted. So, the items were put on the Dec. 2 agenda.
Unwilling to wait any longer, however, Hobbs filed suit and got a judge to order the board to act. It did so on Dec. 1, with Judd joining Democrat Ann English; Crosby did not show up.
That led to an indictment last year on a charge of illegal interference with an election officer. That is based on what the state says was an attempt to prevent Hobbs from completing the statewide canvass, which had to be done by Dec. 5.
A separate count charges the pair for conspiring to delay the formal vote.
Friday’s three-hour hearing featured arguments about not just what laws may or may not have been broken but also whether the state grand jury had jurisdiction and whether that grand jury proceeding was conducted fairly.
But what it all may come down to is whether county supervisors really have any authority to scrutinize the numbers they get from elections officials or whether, as Wilenchik put it, they are merely a “rubber stamp.”
Lawson contends that a canvass is strictly a “ministerial function.” In essence, that means the supervisors review the vote tallies and, unless there are missing votes from a precinct, declare the results official and forward them to the Secretary of State. That, he said, made the failure to perform the canvass within the time guidelines a crime.
Wilenchik said that makes no legal or practical sense.
He said there’s a reason the law requires a formal vote versus just having county election officials forward the results to the Secretary of Stat