2.01: Difference between revisions

From Corrective Action Plan AZ
← Older edit

Neil thibodaux (talk | contribs)

2 user groups
2,035 edits
VisualWikitext
 
(10 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 22: Line 22:


=== Jamie's Story ===
=== Jamie's Story ===
No examples are available to illustrate governance gaps for this attribute.
 
==== [[2021: My Journey Begins]] ====
I directed questions to the Maricopa County Recorder, expecting a response since this is an elected position. I incorrectly assumed that elected officials would be interested in addressing citizen concerns. There was a brief interface between me and the Maricopa County Recorder. However, there was no response to my inquiries. I also receive no responses from the Arizona Secretary of State, who provides oversight to all Arizona County elections. 
 
==== [[November 2022: Mid-term Election]] ====
Katie Hobbs was serving as the Arizona Secretary of State while running for Arizona Governor during the 2022 Mid-term elections. Katie was serving an oversight role for all county elections as the Arizona Secretary of State. Relevant to this Green Book Attribute 2.01, Katie Hobbs oversight was ineffective.


=== Election Anomalies ===
=== Election Anomalies ===
==== Arizona Senate Allegations ====
This Green Book Attribute 2.01 calls for the involvement of oversight. Contrary to this attribute, MC did not believe the Arizona Senate was entitled to oversee the election-related anomalies.  Arizona Senate allegations arose from a failure to recognize the Arizona Senates Oversight Role. These allegations were investigated and reported on by the [https://www.azag.gov/sites/default/files/2025-06/2020_General_Election_Investigation_Summary.pdf Arizona Attorney General's Office 2020 General Election Investigation]. The elected officials were considered as a possible oversight entity for MC operations.
This potential deviation from the Green Book standard applies to the following Arizona Senate Allegations:
* Allegation #1 [[Signature Verification]]
* Allegation #2, [[The Anomalies#Maricopa Dropbox Collection (2020)|Maricopa Dropbox Collection (2020)]]
* Allegation #3, [[The Anomalies#Maricopa Election Management Server (2020)|Maricopa Election Management Server (2020)]]
<blockquote>All of the following are sub-allegations of Allegation #3:
* [[The Anomalies#MC EMS 2020 - Election Management System Database Purged|MC EMS 2020 - Election Management System Database Purged]]
* [[The Anomalies#MC EMS 2020 - Election Files Deleted|MC EMS 2020 - Election Files Deleted]]
* [[The Anomalies#MC EMS 2020 - Corrupt Ballot Images|MC EMS 2020 - Corrupt Ballot Images]]
* [[The Anomalies#MC EMS 2020 - Missing Ballot Images|MC EMS 2020 - Missing Ballot Images]]
* [[The Anomalies#MC EMS 2020 - Failure to Follow Basic Cyber Security Practices|MC EMS 2020 - Failure to Follow Basic Cyber Security Practices]]
* [[The Anomalies#MC EMS 2020 - Subpoenaed Equipment Not Yet Provided|MC EMS 2020 - Subpoenaed Equipment Not Yet Provided]]
* [[The Anomalies#MC EMS 2020 - Anonymous Logins|MC EMS 2020 - Anonymous Logins]]
* [[The Anomalies#MC EMS 2020 - Dual Boot System Discovered|MC EMS 2020 - Dual Boot System Discovered]]
* [[The Anomalies#MC EMS 2020 - Operating System Logs Not Preserved|MC EMS 2020 - Operating System Logs Not Preserved]]
* [[The Anomalies#MC EMS 2020 - Internet Connections to the EMS|MC EMS 2020 - Internet Connections to the EMS]]
</blockquote>
* Allegation #4, [[The Anomalies#Maricopa County Withholding Audit Data (2020)|Maricopa County Withholding Audit Data (2020)]]
** The uncooperative tone is clearly displayed by the MCBOS and MCBOS member Bill Gates.
* Allegation #5, [[The Anomalies#Pima County Embedded 35,000 Votes (2020)|Pima County Embedded 35,000 Votes (2020)]]
* Allegation #6, [[The Anomalies#Unknown Published Election Fraud Flyer (2020)|Unknown Published Election Fraud Flyer (2020)]]
==== Arizona Senate Allegations ====
As already noted in Green Book Attribute [[1.01]] and [[1.02]], Arizona Senate allegations arose from a failure to recognize the Arizona Senates Oversight Role. These allegations were investigated and reported on by the Arizona Attorney General's Office 2020 General Election Investigation. The elected officials were considered as a possible oversight entity for MC operations. In this case, MC Elected Officials and MC leadership were apparently aligned with the position that the Arizona Senate was not entitled to perform oversight. No oversight entity has been identified.
* [[The Anomalies#Maricopa Election Management Server (2020)|Maricopa Election Management Server (2020)]]
** [[The Anomalies#MC EMS 2020 - Election Management System Database Purged|MC EMS 2020 - Election Management System Database Purged]]
** [[The Anomalies#MC EMS 2020 - Election Files Deleted|MC EMS 2020 - Election Files Deleted]]
** [[The Anomalies#MC EMS 2020 - Corrupt Ballot Images|MC EMS 2020 - Corrupt Ballot Images]]
** [[The Anomalies#MC EMS 2020 - Missing Ballot Images|MC EMS 2020 - Missing Ballot Images]]
** [[The Anomalies#MC EMS 2020 - Failure to Follow Basic Cyber Security Practices|MC EMS 2020 - Failure to Follow Basic Cyber Security Practices]]
** [[The Anomalies#MC EMS 2020 - Subpoenaed Equipment Not Yet Provided|MC EMS 2020 - Subpoenaed Equipment Not Yet Provided]]
** [[The Anomalies#MC EMS 2020 - Anonymous Logins|MC EMS 2020 - Anonymous Logins]]
** [[The Anomalies#MC EMS 2020 - Dual Boot System Discovered|MC EMS 2020 - Dual Boot System Discovered]]
** [[The Anomalies#MC EMS 2020 - Operating System Logs Not Preserved|MC EMS 2020 - Operating System Logs Not Preserved]]
** [[The Anomalies#MC EMS 2020 - Internet Connections to the EMS|MC EMS 2020 - Internet Connections to the EMS]]


==== [[Dropbox Collection (2020)]] ====
==== [[Dropbox Collection (2020)]] ====
The [https://www.azag.gov/sites/default/files/2025-06/2020_General_Election_Investigation_Summary.pdf Arizona Attorney General's Office's 2020 General Election Investigation] report did not reference any oversight entities during its investigation of issue #2, Maricopa County Elections Department - Signature Verification Process. In the absence of formal documentation for internal oversight, this potential governance gap was rolled up to this Attribute 2.01, which is an overview of Principle 2.   
There appears to be no independent oversight of Dropbox Collection activities. The [https://www.azag.gov/sites/default/files/2025-06/2020_General_Election_Investigation_Summary.pdf Arizona Attorney General's Office's 2020 General Election Investigation] report did not reference any oversight entities during its investigation of issue #2, Maricopa County Elections Department - Drop Box Collections. In the absence of formal documentation for internal oversight, this potential governance gap was rolled up to this Attribute 2.01, which is an overview of Principle 2.   


For clarification, the Arizona Attorney General's Office is not considered an oversight entity. Their purpose was to investigate for criminal activities. Hence, many of the open items in their report were left unresolved because the issues were noteworthy investigative facts but did not identify a crime.  
This allegation of drop-box issues was raised by the Arizona Senate in 2021, which indicate MC was not adequately responding to regulators in their oversight role.  


<u>Potential Governance Gap:</u>
The Arizona Senate was alerted to documentation discrepancies by Verity the Vote, which was lead by two citizens. Maricopa was unable to resolve issues raised by members of the public, which is why they took their concerns to the Arizona Senate for follow up.


Contrary to the Green Book, no entity was identified as having an oversight body for MC Election Department activities associated with drop box anomalies. The investigation confirmed procedure violations. However, the causes for these procedure violations may still exist in the absence of an oversight entity or documentation within a Corrective Action Plan Process.
The AZ AG's inspector did not mention any oversight bodies or entities in the report.


==== [[Signature Verification|Signature Verification (2020)]] ====
==== [[Signature Verification|Signature Verification (2020)]] ====
The [https://www.azag.gov/sites/default/files/2025-06/2020_General_Election_Investigation_Summary.pdf Arizona Attorney General's Office's 2020 General Election Investigation] report did not reference any oversight entities during its investigation of issue #2, Maricopa County Elections Department - Signature Verification Process. In the absence of formal documentation for internal oversight, this potential governance gap was rolled up to this Attribute 2.01, which is an overview of Principle 2.
There appears to be no independent oversight of Dropbox Collection activities. The [https://www.azag.gov/sites/default/files/2025-06/2020_General_Election_Investigation_Summary.pdf Arizona Attorney General's Office's 2020 General Election Investigation] report did not reference any oversight entities during its investigation of issue #1, Maricopa County Elections Department - Signature Verification Process. In the absence of formal documentation for internal oversight, this potential governance gap was rolled up to this Attribute 2.01, which is an overview of Principle 2.
For clarification, the Arizona Attorney General's Office is not considered an oversight entity. Their purpose was to investigate for criminal activities. Hence, many of the open items in their report were left unresolved because the issues were noteworthy investigative facts but did not identify a crime.
For clarification, the Arizona Attorney General's Office is not considered an oversight entity. Their purpose was to investigate for criminal activities. Hence, many of the open items in their report were left unresolved because the issues were noteworthy investigative facts but did not identify a crime.


Potential Governance Gap:
No entity was identified as having an oversight body for MC Election Department activities associated with signature verification anomalies. The investigation confirmed procedure violations. However, the causes for these procedure violations may still exist in the absence of an oversight entity or documentation within a Corrective Action Plan Process.
 
Contrary to the Green Book, no entity was identified as having an oversight body for MC Election Department activities associated with drop box anomalies. The investigation confirmed procedure violations. However, the causes for these procedure violations may still exist in the absence of an oversight entity or documentation within a Corrective Action Plan Process.

Latest revision as of 21:50, 4 September 2026

Control Environment

Principle 2 - Exercise Oversight Responsibility

Attribute 2.01 - The oversight body should oversee the entity's internal control system.

Attribute Categories:

The following attributes contribute to the design, implementation, and operating effectiveness of this principle:

  • Oversight Structure
  • Oversight for the Internal Control System
  • Input for Remediation of Deficiencies

***

Navigational Buttons:

Jamie's Story

2021: My Journey Begins

I directed questions to the Maricopa County Recorder, expecting a response since this is an elected position. I incorrectly assumed that elected officials would be interested in addressing citizen concerns. There was a brief interface between me and the Maricopa County Recorder. However, there was no response to my inquiries. I also receive no responses from the Arizona Secretary of State, who provides oversight to all Arizona County elections.

November 2022: Mid-term Election

Katie Hobbs was serving as the Arizona Secretary of State while running for Arizona Governor during the 2022 Mid-term elections. Katie was serving an oversight role for all county elections as the Arizona Secretary of State. Relevant to this Green Book Attribute 2.01, Katie Hobbs oversight was ineffective.

Election Anomalies

Arizona Senate Allegations

This Green Book Attribute 2.01 calls for the involvement of oversight. Contrary to this attribute, MC did not believe the Arizona Senate was entitled to oversee the election-related anomalies. Arizona Senate allegations arose from a failure to recognize the Arizona Senates Oversight Role. These allegations were investigated and reported on by the Arizona Attorney General's Office 2020 General Election Investigation. The elected officials were considered as a possible oversight entity for MC operations.

This potential deviation from the Green Book standard applies to the following Arizona Senate Allegations:

All of the following are sub-allegations of Allegation #3:

Arizona Senate Allegations

As already noted in Green Book Attribute 1.01 and 1.02, Arizona Senate allegations arose from a failure to recognize the Arizona Senates Oversight Role. These allegations were investigated and reported on by the Arizona Attorney General's Office 2020 General Election Investigation. The elected officials were considered as a possible oversight entity for MC operations. In this case, MC Elected Officials and MC leadership were apparently aligned with the position that the Arizona Senate was not entitled to perform oversight. No oversight entity has been identified.

Dropbox Collection (2020)

There appears to be no independent oversight of Dropbox Collection activities. The Arizona Attorney General's Office's 2020 General Election Investigation report did not reference any oversight entities during its investigation of issue #2, Maricopa County Elections Department - Drop Box Collections. In the absence of formal documentation for internal oversight, this potential governance gap was rolled up to this Attribute 2.01, which is an overview of Principle 2.

This allegation of drop-box issues was raised by the Arizona Senate in 2021, which indicate MC was not adequately responding to regulators in their oversight role.

The Arizona Senate was alerted to documentation discrepancies by Verity the Vote, which was lead by two citizens. Maricopa was unable to resolve issues raised by members of the public, which is why they took their concerns to the Arizona Senate for follow up.

The AZ AG's inspector did not mention any oversight bodies or entities in the report.

Signature Verification (2020)

There appears to be no independent oversight of Dropbox Collection activities. The Arizona Attorney General's Office's 2020 General Election Investigation report did not reference any oversight entities during its investigation of issue #1, Maricopa County Elections Department - Signature Verification Process. In the absence of formal documentation for internal oversight, this potential governance gap was rolled up to this Attribute 2.01, which is an overview of Principle 2. For clarification, the Arizona Attorney General's Office is not considered an oversight entity. Their purpose was to investigate for criminal activities. Hence, many of the open items in their report were left unresolved because the issues were noteworthy investigative facts but did not identify a crime.

No entity was identified as having an oversight body for MC Election Department activities associated with signature verification anomalies. The investigation confirmed procedure violations. However, the causes for these procedure violations may still exist in the absence of an oversight entity or documentation within a Corrective Action Plan Process.

Retrieved from "https://arizonacitizenvoice.com/index.php?title=2.01&oldid=2398"