A small border county in Arizona voted to conduct a hand count audit of all ballots, disregarding legal warnings from the county’s attorney and threats of lawsuits and investigations.
The decision creates a wave of uncertainty for elections workers in the county just two weeks before election day and with early voting, the primary way Arizonans cast ballots, already underway.
Cochise county is the latest to pursue a hand count, predicated on false claims of a stolen 2020 election and compromised tabulation machines. The county, which voted for Trump in 2020, had about 75,000 registered voters as of this August’s primary. In the 2018 midterm elections about 46,000 people cast ballots there. Nye county, Nevada, which plans to hand count its ballots, has been sued over the decision.
The Cochise county board of supervisors voted 2-1 to approve the hand count, with the two Republican members voting in favor. But the next steps of the count – and whether it will happen at all – are still up in the air, as legal threats loom and elections officials await details on how, exactly, they could follow the board’s directive.
Arizona secretary of state Katie Hobbs’s office warned the county that it would be sued if the hand count was approved, saying there’s no legal precedent for the move. There’s no evidence that hand counting ballots is more accurate; in fact, hand counts tend to be more costly and less accurate, providing more room for human error.
County attorney Brian McIntyre repeatedly told the board they could not legally initiate a full hand count, telling board members that they might be personally liable for any legal costs stemming from the decision if they went against his advice.
“Ultimately, the legislature is the proper place to address this. That’s how government works – not unilaterally deciding to go a new direction because of the will of an admittedly vocal portion of the public. Additionally, you cannot order county employees to violate the law,” McIntyre, a Republican, told the board.
The county’s insurer, too, told the board that its insurance may not cover them in a lawsuit because it ignored legal advice.
A Republican state lawmaker, Representative Joel John, told the county he would file a complaint that the county is breaking state law if they proceed with the hand count, which puts a chunk of the county’s funds at risk.
Hobbs’s office sent a letter to the county on Tuesday asking for details on the hand count plans and reiterating state law and procedures on how hand counts can be conducted, saying she wanted the board to confirm it would not conduct a full hand count of ballots. She gave the board until the end of Wednesday to answer or face a lawsuit.
The board first rejected a proposal in Monday’s meeting for a full hand count conducted by volunteers who wanted to help people “who have lost trust in elections to see that elections are reliable and secure in our county”, the agenda item said.
But the proposal approved by the board doesn’t appear to be much different. The county will tabulate its results using tabulation machines, then conduct a 100% hand count audit of the county’s ballots, which would have to be completed before the results are canvassed.
“It is widely known that many voters lack confidence in the voting system. A 100% county wide hand count audit of the 2022 General Election will enhance voter confidence. It will provide proof of concept for emergency back-up if the voting machine(s) failed in the future,” the proposal says.
It’s still unclear, though, just how many ballots would be hand counted and how a hand count would comport with state law. Attorneys analyzing the proposal have come to different conclusions on what the proposal directs the county to do, exactly. The hand count could be just of certain precincts or ballot types, or it could be of all ballots. The secretary of state’s letter seeks to clarify what the board meant in its vote.
State election procedures set out specific rules for hand counting after tabulation, which typically entails bipartisan hand counts of a small percentage of precincts or ballots.
Four hours of testimony over the proposals included rampant and baseless claims of election fraud from some speakers, while others urged the county not to waste money and throw the election into disarray in the middle of voting.
Supervisor Peggy Judd, who voted for the hand count, was undeterred by the potential illegality of the hand count. “I could take advice all day and probably not change my mind. But I’d really like to have this chance, take this chance. And my heart and my work have been in it and I don’t feel like I want to back down. So, I might go to jail. Oh well,” she said at the meeting.
Board chair Ann English, a Democrat who voted against the hand count, said she hadn’t seen any details on how exactly a hand count would be done.
“No research, no dollars, no time. In other words, no specifics,” she said at Monday’s board meeting.
The meeting ended on an uncertain note, and more meetings to sort out what happens next will be required.
“I’ll have to check with the county attorney because I’m not sure we can say that it will move forward if it’s determined to be illegal,” English said. “Do you have a comment on that?” she asked McIntyre.
“We have to wait until what tomorrow brings,” McIntyre said.
