PHOENIX — Arizonans will finally get to see on Sept. 24 what auditors have concluded about whether there was fraud, misconduct, mistakes or anything else in the conduct of the 2020 election in Maricopa County that denied a Donald Trump victory in the state.

Senate President Karen Fann said there will be an open session at 1 p.m. that day on the Senate floor so that Doug Logan, CEO of Cyber Ninjas, can present the findings to her and Sen. Warren Petersen, R-Gilbert, who chairs the Judiciary Committee. Cyber Ninjas, hired by Fann to conduct the review, was given possession of about 2.1 million ballots plus voting equipment and charged with determining the accuracy of the official results that gave the victory to Joe Biden.

There also will be a presentation via video from Shiva Ayyadurai, who has been linked to various election conspiracy theories. The Senate separately hired Ayyadurai to review voter signatures on mail-in ballots.

At that point, Fann said, electronic copies of the report will be made available. She said the findings will not be discussed until a future — and not-yet-scheduled — meeting of Petersen’s committee.

All this comes as the attorney for the Senate was in court on Thursday explaining to Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Michael Kemp why his client has not yet disclosed all of the documents it has in its possession.

Kory Langhofer said thousands of pages already have been turned over to American Oversight, the self-proclaimed watchdog organization that filed suit demanding everything relating to the audit. He said there are documents, including texts, that the Senate believes are shielded from public disclosure under the concept of “legislative privilege.’’

Fann told Capitol Media Services the number of withheld documents is about 2,700.

That doesn’t include perhaps 60,000 other documents still in the possession of Cyber Ninjas that have not yet been turned over to the Senate despite a Tuesday ruling from the Arizona Supreme Court. Langhofer said once the Senate gets those documents there may be claims that some are confidential.

Attorney Keith Beauchamp, who represents American Oversight, argues that his client and the public are entitled to see not just the final report but also draft versions.

Those drafts could prove crucial in determining what changes were made between the time Cyber Ninjas submits its findings to the Senate and what is released as the final conclusion. Any changes are bound to raise questions about why the alterations were made.

“We ought to receive that today if it’s in their possession and it’s a public document,’’ Beauchamp told the judge.

Fann, however, said the Senate does not yet have the draft report. Langhofer conceded in court there’s a caveat to all that.

“I believe the Senate or its agents are in possession of a draft report, but not from Cyber Ninjas,’’ he told the judge. “There were some ancillary reports. But the main one, the Senate does not have yet.’’

Fann said some of that comes from Shelby Busch, co-founder of We The People Arizona Alliance, who has raised questions about the accuracy of the election results. The Senate president said Busch worked with “some grass-roots people who worked the polls.’’

“They put a document together of things that they observed at the polls, things that went on,’’ Fann said. “They went through all of the recordings and videos of MCTEC (Maricopa County Tabulation and Election Center) about some things.’’

Fann said there are people who have filled out affidavits “documenting things when they were working at the polls, what they observed.’’

Whatever Fann has, American Oversight wants that, too.

As to that draft report, Langhofer said the Senate is under no legal obligation to make it public, either before or after the promised Sept. 24 release of the final version.

“There are reasons that drafts shouldn’t be made public because there are things about them that need to be rethought or refined,’’ he said. Langhofer said that’s why the public does not get draft court opinions or police reports.

Beauchamp called the comparison invalid.

“It’s an audit,’’ he said. “It’s nothing like a draft judicial report or a draft criminal investigatory report.’’

That still leaves the legal question of a potentially large trove of documents that the Senate says are protected by legislative privilege and are none of the public’s business.

One batch in dispute involves texts between Fann and Logan. The Senate contends that all is protected by “legislative privilege.’’

Roopali Desai, another attorney for American Oversight, said the Senate is stretching the definition of what is privileged.

“We believe records they are withholding that are ancillary to the audit — procedures, hiring, fundraising, those kinds of things — those don’t come under the legislative privilege and should be produced,’’ she said.

Better than a comments section

Discuss the news on NABUR,
a place to have local conversations

The Neighborhood Alliance for Better Understanding and Respect
A site just for our local community
Focused on facts, not misinformation
Free for everyone

Join the community
What's NABUR?