A man who has brought several court challenges over Arizona elections is now suing Pima County over its certification of the results in the election which approved the RTA Next transportation plan last month.
The plaintiff is John Brakey, who leads an organization called AUDIT USA. According to its website, the organization “works for election transparency so regular people can verify whether our votes are counted accurately.”
He spoke about his concerns at a Pima County Board of Supervisors meeting on March 24.
“I’m not asking you to overturn this election and I’m not alleging fraud. I am asking for something much simpler. Before you certify this election, take a short pause and verify it using the records that your system already produces,” Brakey said.
Later that day, county supervisors unanimously voted to certify the March 10 election results.
On March 30, Brakey sued each county supervisor and Pima County Recorder Gabriella Cazares-Kelly. He is representing himself in court.
In his complaint, Brakey alleges that about 5,000 voters were removed from the county’s list of total registered voters on the final day of counting ballots. He also claims that about 500 ballots were “added to the Elections Department totals without a corresponding transfer record from the Recorder’s Office” until he alerted the county to that discrepancy.
Brakey is asking county officials to explain the alleged discrepancies and to allow an audit of the results against ballot images and Cast Vote Records held by the county. Some local governments around the country release ballot images and CVRs publicly.
Brakey was part of the 2020 presidential election recount in Maricopa County and has sued several Arizona counties over public records and election results — with a patchy track record — the Tucson Agenda reported.
A Pima County judge gave Brakey and Pima County until April 9 to come to an agreement and did not schedule a hearing in the case. According to court documents, Brakey personally served a summons to three of the defendants, which the court informed him is not legally allowed and the defendants' attorney argued gives the court no jurisdiction to handle the lawsuit.
