Embattled Maricopa County Attorney Rachel Mitchell has gone scorched earth after an Arizona lawmaker revealed that the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors has rejected a deal to increase election integrity.
According to sources, Arizona State Representative Alex Kolodin reached out to Mitchell to ask her if she would “talk sense” to the members of the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors regarding efforts between Runbeck, a private company that prints ballots and provides other elections services to a number of Arizona counties including Maricopa, and the Board of Supervisors.
For months, Runbeck has willingly participated in negotiations in an effort to increase voter confidence, especially in Maricopa County which has been surrounded by controversy due to numerous botched elections.
The Board of Supervisors rejected the improvements.
With Election Day nearing, and their popularity sagging, interested parties hoped Mitchell and the Board would see the benefit of restoring trust. Instead, Mitchell went on the attack in a tweet.
“Rep. Kolodin has misrepresentated the situation by claiming that it was the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office (MCAO) that rejected this change in terms. Quite the contrary: The Maricopa County Attorney’s Office has NO authority to accept or reject the terms. MCAO only can advise the Board of Supervisors as to what the law allows the Board to do.
Rep. Kolodin’s misinformation campaign is false, irresponsible, and incendiary.”
Kolodin, however, never claimed that the MCAO accepted or rejected the terms but rather had asked the board to reject them.
“It is well known among members of the conservative election law bar that Tom Liddy, Rachal Mitchell’s right-hand man, has incredible influence with the Board when it comes to their decisions on election policy. The fact that the Board did not convey “its decision” itself, but rather had that decision conveyed by Tom Liddy, speaks volumes,” said Kolodin.
“We saw what happened in the primary with a reasonably free and fair election under this MOU and apparently Maricopa County didn’t like it,” said Kolodin, referring to the fact that a provision of the MOU had been put in place during the August primary that allowed an expanded bipartisan observation program.
