Maricopa County Board of Supervisors Withholding Audit Data (2020)

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

• List of Election Anomalies
  • Arizona Attorney General's Inspector's report of Arizona Senate of Allegations
    • Allegation #4: Maricopa County Board of Supervisors - Data not provided for election audit-----
      • [Click for Allegation #3 or Allegation #5]

This page seeks to explain potential governance gaps with respect to allegations from the Arizona Senate, specifically for allegation #4 Maricopa County Board of Supervisors - Data not provided for election audit. These were investigated by the Arizona Attorney General's Office 2020 General Election Investigation Report. This topic is listed on 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 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

All legislative Subpoenaed data/materials were not provided by Maricopa County Officials to State Senate.

Investigators Notes

• On November 23, 2021, Mr Bill Gates of the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors responded to questions sent by Special Agent Geisler. Mr. Gates did not grant agents an interview and would only answer questions pre-submitted in writting.
• Mr. Gates indicated all data was provided to the State Senate Attorney Kory Lanhofer and Senate Liaison Ken Bennett and not to "Auditors."
• He confirmed the board received Legislative Subpoenas issued on January 12th 2021 and July 26th 2021.
• Following a settlement agreement and Judge Thomason's decision on February 2021, State Senate President Fann confirmed the Board fully complied. After signing the settlement agreement, President Fann sent a letter to Attorney General Brnovich on September 17th 2021 stating:
  • "Accordingly, the settlement agreement places the County in compliance with applicalble state law, including the subpoena, and additional action by your office is not warranted at this time."
• Mr. Gates stated that all data was provided as requested by the subpoena and that election archived data was not subpoenaed and not provided to the State Senate.
• He further related that sensitive routers and log files were not provided and were part of the settlement agreement.
• Mr. Gates stated he is not aware of what was provided to Cyber Ninjas by the Senate and that question should be directed to Senate President Fann.

Report Finding

Unfounded Allegation. According to statements made by Mr. Bill Gates and a letter dated September 17th 2021 by State Senate President Karen Fann to Attorney General Mark Brnovich, all materials were provided to the State Senate by Maricopa County. Mr Gates confirmed that materials not listed in the subpoena or settlement agreement were not released to the Senate.

Noteworthy Observations

Arizona Senate allegation #4 was directed at the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors. Therefore, the relevant Green Book Attributes are constrained to Control Environment, which consists of Principles 1, 2, 3 and 4. The control environment is the foundation for an effective internal control system. It provides the discipline and structure, which affect the overall quality of internal control. It influences how objectives are defined and how control activities are structured. The oversight body and management establish and maintain an environment throughout the entity that sets a positive attitude toward internal control.

Observation #1 - Adversarial Tone Towards Oversight

The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors (MCBOS) did not respect the Arizona Senate's oversight role into election-related anomalies that occurred during the 2020 General Election.

• MCBOS did not voluntarily supply the information and equipment requested by the Arizona Senate.
• Arizona Senate issued to subpoenas to force MCBOS to comply with their request (January 12th 2021 and July 26th 2021).
• MCBOS chose to litigate the subpoenas rather that comply with the Arizona's legal request for information and equipment.
• MCBOS delayed their response, which wasn't cleared until September 17, 2021. Apparently, the settlement agreement between the MCBOS and the Arizona Senate President had not been communicated promptly to the applicable Senate committee, which referred the MCBOS to the Arizona Attorney General for criminal investigation on September 24, 2021.

Additionally, Mr. Bill Gates, a MCBOS member, did not respect the Arizona Attorney General's investigators.

• He refused to be interviewed by a Special Agent.
• He would only respond to written questions submitted by a Special Agent.

Observation #1 - Setting a Poor Example

The MCBOS set a tone of secrecy and demonstrated to subordinates that MC was autonomous and did not need to submit to any oversight.