16-450. Location and acquisition of vote tabulating devices
The vote tabulating device may be located at any place within the state approved by the board of supervisors of the county or the governing board of other political subdivisions using the device. The same device may be jointly owned, borrowed, leased or used by two or more counties, cities or other political subdivisions to tabulate ballots cast in any election.
So this hinges on whether alternate sites were approved by the board of supervisors. Not some member of the board. But the board itself. I do not know whether this occurred or not.
I don't think Runbeck was listed as a tabulating location on Maricopa County website prior to the Election as required by the AZ statute.
16-450. Location and acquisition of vote tabulating devices
The vote tabulating device may be located at any place within the state approved by the board of supervisors of the county or the governing board of other political subdivisions using the device. The same device may be jointly owned, borrowed, leased or used by two or more counties, cities or other political subdivisions to tabulate ballots cast in any election.
I don't know either. Never bothered to look. And I am unsure that there is a statute requiring them to list this on their website either. There are so many statutes in that section that encompass a broad range of topics, it is difficult to navigate. And I am also not sure there is a statute that precludes an on the spot vote of the board.
I know they list on their website that they use the precinct register signature roster to compare signatures on early ballots, which is in direct contravention to the statute. The statute specifically requires the elector's registration record. Of which, the precinct signature roster is not. That signature roster is for in person voting, not early voting.
Last I recall, they still operate on the 2019 elections manual because Brnovich rejected the changes to the 2021 manual. But at least as far as it relates to signature verification for early ballots in the 2019 manual, Brnovich approved a procedure in direct contravention of the express language of the relevant statutes. Although I don't really know how advantageous to fraud it is to be able to use the signature roster. Odds that the same person signs the same way for the same fraudulent vote are slim to none.
I have spent a lot more time reading the procedures manual and the statutes than I ever thought I would on this topic. It would appear that beyond the statute I cited, nothing seems to cover this area. There is no mention in the procedures manual. And I can find no such statute governing the process for how the board determines where to tabulate and under what circumstances/timeline can that be altered.
I am unaware of the law that is claimed here. Missing any citation to the law leaves only guesswork as to what the author is referencing.
https://www.azleg.gov/viewdocument/?docName=https://www.azleg.gov/ars/16/00450.htm
16-450. Location and acquisition of vote tabulating devices
The vote tabulating device may be located at any place within the state approved by the board of supervisors of the county or the governing board of other political subdivisions using the device. The same device may be jointly owned, borrowed, leased or used by two or more counties, cities or other political subdivisions to tabulate ballots cast in any election.
So this hinges on whether alternate sites were approved by the board of supervisors. Not some member of the board. But the board itself. I do not know whether this occurred or not.
I don't think Runbeck was listed as a tabulating location on Maricopa County website prior to the Election as required by the AZ statute.
I don't know either. Never bothered to look. And I am unsure that there is a statute requiring them to list this on their website either. There are so many statutes in that section that encompass a broad range of topics, it is difficult to navigate. And I am also not sure there is a statute that precludes an on the spot vote of the board.
I know they list on their website that they use the precinct register signature roster to compare signatures on early ballots, which is in direct contravention to the statute. The statute specifically requires the elector's registration record. Of which, the precinct signature roster is not. That signature roster is for in person voting, not early voting.
Last I recall, they still operate on the 2019 elections manual because Brnovich rejected the changes to the 2021 manual. But at least as far as it relates to signature verification for early ballots in the 2019 manual, Brnovich approved a procedure in direct contravention of the express language of the relevant statutes. Although I don't really know how advantageous to fraud it is to be able to use the signature roster. Odds that the same person signs the same way for the same fraudulent vote are slim to none.
I have spent a lot more time reading the procedures manual and the statutes than I ever thought I would on this topic. It would appear that beyond the statute I cited, nothing seems to cover this area. There is no mention in the procedures manual. And I can find no such statute governing the process for how the board determines where to tabulate and under what circumstances/timeline can that be altered.