View source for Pima County voter spike prior to 2020 General Election

In your exploration of election-related anomalies, you are here:

* List of [[The Anomalies|Election Anomalies]]
** Arizona Attorney General's Inspector's report of Arizona Senate of Allegations
*** '''Allegation #5: Pima County Elections Department -- Voter spike prior to 2020 General Election'''----
**** [Click for [[Maricopa County Board of Supervisors Withholding Audit Data (2020)|Allegation #4]] or [[Unknown Published Election Fraud Flyer (2020)|Allegation #6]]]

This page seeks to explain potential governance gaps with respect to allegations from the Arizona Senate, specifically for allegation #5 Pima County Election Department - Voter spike prior to 2020 General Election. These were investigated by the A[https://www.azag.gov/sites/default/files/2025-06/2020_General_Election_Investigation_Summary.pdf rizona Attorney General's Office 2020 General Election Investigation Report.] This topic is listed on [[The Anomalies|'''Election Anomalies''']] page, which lists various election-related anomalies that illustrate poor governance.

''Governance Gaps'' are reported on and compared to a standard so that you may visualize how poorly managed County services can have an adverse impact without any criminal wrongdoing. We chose the [https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-25-107721.pdf United States Government Accountability Office's (GAO) ''Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government''] (also known as the ''Green Book'') because it represents the ideal standard for governance practices since it is specifically written for government entities, not the business sector. Maricopa County has no obligation or commitments to adhere to any governance-related standards, including the Green Book. Regardless, the Green Book is a representation of what good governance looks like and deviations from that standard are worthy of consideration, not prosecution.
 The Governance Gap Assessment Team are not IT security experts. The technical aspects of the IT configuration are not being disputed. The assessment for governance gaps sought to understand how data and information was being treated with respect to the US GAO's Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government.

=== AZ AG's Report Contents ===

==== Allegation #5 - Pima County Election Department -- Voter spike prior to 2020 General Election ====
Pima County had a 90% voter increase reported in some precincts during the 2020 General Election.

==== Investigators Notes ====

* According to US Census Bureau, the population for Pima County on April 1, 2020 was 1,043,433
** 772,140 were of legal voting age, which is 74%

* According to the voter statistics from the Arizona Secretary of State official 2020 Canvas for Pima County:
** The General Election Data (November 3, 2020) - [Votes cast]
*** 638,355 Total Eligible Voters
*** 526, 319 Total Ballots Cast
*** 112,036 No Vote Cast
*** 82.% Voter Turnout
** The Primary Election Data (August 4, 2020) - [Eligible voters by Party]
*** 584,070 Total Eligible Voters
*** 171,331 Republican
*** 230,325 Democratic
*** 4,243 Libertarian
*** 178,171 Other
* Pima County Recorder Ann Rodriguez sent a letter to the Pima County Board of Supervisors on November 18, 2020, with the following election data:
** 489,623 registered voters are on the Permanent Early Voting List, which is 76.7%.
** Ballot return rate was 87.5%, the highest rate for any prior election.
** 526,319 votes were cast, which was 87.36%. Again, this was the highest rate in any prior general election.
* The AZ AG's inspector notes that Ann Rodriguez also reported an increase in drop-off ballots vs. walk-in voters, which was supported by statistics but not carried forward into the AZ AG's report.

==== Report Finding ====
'''Unfounded Allegation'''. Between August 4, 2020 to November 3, 2020, the total of registered voters in Pima County increased by 54,285 voters. This 8.5% increase in voter registration validates the continuousness of the 2020 General Election. This review did not uncover any potential election fraud associated with the allegation. It should be also noted that Pima County Attorney's Office investigated 151 incidents reported by the Pima County Recorder's Office of potential voter fraud. These investigations determined that most were voter confusion about the electoral process to mail-in and provisional ballots. These additional ballots were not counted in the final tally of votes.

=== Noteworthy Observations ===
There are no noteworthy observations. The investigation of this allegation did not reveal any Pima County behaviors or actions that could be used to assess governance. The one description of the Pima County Recorder's letter was simply reporting data, no internal control attributes were noted.

=== Potential Governance Gaps: ===
No potential governance gaps were identified given the absence of any deviation or noteworthy observations relevant to internal controls.