A few days ago, I participated in a four-hour hearing that will hopefully put to bed any lingering questions about the integrity of the November 2020 general election in Maricopa County.

In response to the “audit” performed by Cyber Ninjas and other Senate contractors, the Maricopa County Elections Department produced a 93-page report entitled “Correcting the Record: An In-Depth Analysis of the Senate’s Inquiry.” The Elections Department presented its findings to the Board of Supervisors and County Recorder during a hearing we broadcast live on YouTube on January 5.

The report, produced by seasoned election professionals, confirms what we’ve said all along:

• The canvassed results were accurate.
• All the declared winners won.
• No systemic issues were identified.
• All federal, state, and local laws were followed.

Our report shows nearly every claim made by Senate contractors is false, inaccurate, or misleading.

Cyber Ninjas claimed there were more than 53,000 questionable ballots cast in 2020.

Our analysis found fewer than 100 out of 2.1 million with no systemic issues identified and no impact on the outcome of races. You can read the full report at JustTheFacts.vote.

None of this is surprising to me. As the chairman of the Board of Supervisors in 2020, my priority was running three great elections. And we did.

With each election, we learned something. And we applied those lessons to the next election. By November, we made a good system even better and had the right processes in place to ensure all eligible votes were counted.

Unfortunately, a few senators chose to believe lies, rumors, and innuendo instead of experienced election professionals. The Senate’s “audit” relied on the guesswork of inexperienced and biased individuals with no election auditing experience. It’s no wonder 74 of their 75 claims were debunked and Cyber Ninjas is now defunct.

What we need to do now is get back to what works. If the Legislature wants to create new laws regarding elections, great. But let’s make those laws based on verifiable facts and in concert with election professionals. No laws should come from discredited Ninja claims.

Whatever rules we agree upon need to be in place prior to our elections. People who want to move the goalposts after the fact because they don’t like the results damage trust. Any and all post-election audits should be guided by proven, consistent processes or else they will cause confusion. Elected leaders should exercise extreme caution before casting doubt on election integrity or results. Failure to do so puts real people — election workers, elected leaders, etc. — at risk.

No election is perfect, but what our report confirms is the November 2020 general election in Maricopa County is about as close as you can get. A record number of people participated, their votes were counted as they were cast using proven processes, and both Republicans and Democrats won local and statewide races. If one of your preferred candidates or causes lost in 2020, that’s not proof of fraud — that’s proof of democracy working.

I look forward to working with our board, the recorder, the Elections Department, and the political parties to run great elections in 2022. I’m hopeful we can all take a step back this year, see the good in one another, vote our conscience, and then accept the results as Americans of all political persuasions have done for generations.

Clint Hickman was appointed to the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors on March 21, 2013, and was subsequently elected in 2016 and 2020.

A superior court judge on Tuesday left open the possibility of finding the Arizona Senate in contempt of court in the coming weeks.  

A liberal watchdog group asked in a hearing to hold the Senate in contempt for not obtaining documents from Cyber Ninjas and its sub-vendors, per an earlier court order. 

But Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Michael Kemp wasn’t ready to make that ruling, and he won’t until at least Dec. 2, when a contempt hearing is scheduled. 

American Oversight in May sued the Arizona Senate for a bevy of records related to the election review of the 2020 general election in Maricopa County. While the Senate has made public some of its audit-related documents, records in possession of contractors and legislative privilege continue to be sticking points. 

If Kemp does find the Senate in contempt, Senate attorney Kory Langhofer said he’s not worried about winning at the appellate court level, saying it was “ridiculous” to argue that holding the Senate in contempt would, in turn, compel Cyber Ninjas to hand over its records. 

“(Senate President) Karen Fann cannot snap her fingers and get these documents; the problem is Cyber Ninjas,” Langhofer said, adding that American Oversight could sue the contractor itself. 

However, American Oversight attorney Keith Beauchamp argued the Senate has not pursued every option to comply with the court order to produce records in Cyber Ninjas’ possession. 

Beauchamp offered up some options, arguing the Senate could sue Cyber Ninjas for breaching its contract, reach out for assistance from the Sheriff’s Office, or refer the matter to the attorney general. Beauchamp also suggested the Senate withhold payment and threaten to take back what it’s already paid to the contractor.  

But Beauchamp also said the burden is on the Senate, not American Oversight, to show it has taken all reasonable steps to comply with the court’s previous order. 

“I have illustrated a number of steps that they could take that they haven’t yet,” Beauchamp said. “And frankly, the only steps they have taken, limited ones, have been because we are seeking contempt.” 

He also suggested a more severe option.  

“You could fine them,” he told Kemp. “You could put them in jail.”  

But Langhofer said the options Beauchamp mentioned wouldn’t solve the problem. 

Langhofer said anyone could refer the issue to the attorney general, including Beauchamp, and that he didn’t know of anyone being held in contempt for not contacting law enforcement, especially about an issue being publicly discussed in hearings such as that one. The Senate is already withholding $100,000 of the $150,000 it agreed to pay Cyber Ninjas, Langhofer said. He added that the court should not compel the Senate to sue Cyber Ninjas to avoid being found in contempt.  

“I think that moves the court into an advocacy role, which is inappropriate,” Langhofer said.  

The Senate notified Cyber Ninjas last week that it breached its contract by not complying with the court order and has also reached out to sub-vendors in an attempt to obtain responsive records. Langhofer said the sub-vendors have not responded, and Cyber Ninjas have continued to respond, essentially, with “pound sand.” 

Cyber Ninjas is not a party in the American Oversight lawsuit, though they are a party in a separate public records lawsuit brought by the Arizona Republic. Cyber Ninjas maintains that it should not be a party in either case and that it is not bound by Kemp’s rulings in the American Oversight case. 

In a friend of the court brief, Cyber Ninjas attorney Jack Wilenchik said the only record the Senate was entitled to was the Cyber Ninjas’ final audit report and that ruling otherwise would set a “terrifying precedent” for government contractors. 

“CNI’s own records are not public records simply because they may relate to that report, which seems to be the contention here,” Wilenchik wrote. 

During the hearing, Kemp also did not grant a stay on his Oct. 14 order compelling the Senate to release many of the documents it claimed fell under legislative privilege. The Senate asked for the stay to give it time to seek a stay or review from the Court of Appeals.  

Kemp said he thought the Senate would be unlikely succeed on appeal and that the potential harm to the Senate of releasing documents did not outweigh the harm to American Oversight of not receiving them.  

“This is a very important public policy issue with very strong public interest in this case,” Kemp said.  

He scheduled a status conference at 10 a.m. on Nov. 29.  

If the Senate does not dissuade the court from holding a contempt hearing, that will take place at 1:30 p.m. on Dec. 2. 

“We want the documents; we don’t want a contempt hearing,” Beauchamp said. “But if we can’t get the documents, we ought to get a contempt hearing to find out why the Senate won’t do everything within its power (to get the records).”