Kent Volkmer Was Pinal County Attorney In 2024. [Pinal County Attorney’s Office, accessed 3/27/24]

Kent Volkmer Was Elected Pinal County Attorney As A Republican In 2020. [Pinal County, 2020 Election Results, 11/12/20]

VOLKMER WAS AWARE THERE WERE DISCREPANCIES WITH PINAL COUTY’S 2022 GENERAL ELECTION BUT NO ONE TOLD THE AZ SOS UNTIL A RECOUNT

Pinal County Supervisors Unanimously Certified The Canvass Of The 2022 General Election. “Item Action: Approved. Motion Made By: Supervisor Goodman Seconded By: Supervisor Cavanaugh. To approve the canvass of the election official results for the November 8, 2022 General Election. Motion Passed Ayes: Cavanaugh, Goodman, McClure, Miller, Serdy (5)” [Pinal County Board of Supervisors, Minutes, 11/21/22]

During The 11/21 Canvass Meeting Jeff Serdy Said That Though He Didn’t “Really Want To Discuss It Now” He Was Hearing About “Issues” That Could Have “Affected The Count.” “During the supervisors' meeting the morning of Nov. 21 just before they voted Supervisor Jeff Serdy said that although he didn't ‘really want to discuss it now,’ he was hearing about ‘issues’ that could have ‘affected the count.’” [Votebeat, 5/5/23]

County Attorney Kent Volkmer Expressed Surprise That There Were Rumors Of Issues But No One Suggested Looking Into The Issue Further Before Certifying. “During the supervisors' meeting the morning of Nov. 21 just before they voted Supervisor Jeff Serdy said that although he didn't ‘really want to discuss it now,’ he was hearing about ‘issues’ that could have ‘affected the count.’ Volkmer, the county attorney, responded with surprise, saying this was ‘news to him’ and ‘everything would suggest there has been no irregularities.’ No one suggested looking into this further before certifying. ‘I can tell you that I am incredibly confident, as confident as I could possibly be, in the numbers that are being provided to this board,’ Volkmer said. ‘I don't believe there is anything nefarious.’”  [Votebeat, 5/5/23]

Pinal County Had A 500-Vote Undercount Discovered During A Recount In The 2022 General. “The decision to put Lewis at the helm of the county’s election operations comes after a number of mishaps throughout last year’s election. The problems began during the August primary when county officials sent out about 63,000 early ballots with errors. After the November election, officials discovered a 500-vote undercount during a recount of two statewide races with tight margins. The undercount didn’t change the results of the races but added fuel to election integrity conspiracies and heightened concerns around election administration in the county.” [Arizona Daily Star, 8/18/23]

• The Undercount Went Unnoticed Because Some Check-In Stations Were Not Properly Scanning Drivers’ License, Thought To Account For The Discrepancy In Poll Pad Numbers Versus The Actual Vote Count. “County Attorney Kent Volkmer said all votes initially were counted by Nov. 17, and the results were sent to the board that evening. Supervisors then certified those results Nov. 21. ‘The canvassing of the results isn't a blessing of the results, or anything along those lines,’ Volkmer said. ‘It says, 'This is what was transmitted to us. This is official. We're now transmitting it to the Secretary of State's Office so that election challenges can begin'’ That same day, Elections Director Geraldine Roll began preparing for a recount. Officials had become aware of an Election Day issue with voter check-ins at some polling sites. Some check-in stations weren't properly scanning driver's licenses. ‘We knew ... that there was some discrepancy in what our poll pad numbers were reporting and what our actual vote count was,’ Volkmer said. ‘But we believed that it was just that difference in people whose IDs didn't scan. We did not believe it impacted the vote totals whatsoever.’ While looking into the problem, Roll found the discrepancies on Nov. 28, according to Volkmer. She checked to make sure there was no other potential explanation for the difference and then reported it to Volkmer Nov. 30. ‘That's the first time Pinal County said, 'Uh oh,'’ Volkmer said.” [Arizona Daily Star, 1/6/23]

Election Staff Became Aware Of Discrepancies On 11/28 But Did Not Report To The Secretary Of State Until 12/9. “While looking into the problem, Roll found the discrepancies on Nov. 28, according to Volkmer. She checked to make sure there was no other potential explanation for the difference and then reported it to Volkmer Nov. 30. ‘That's the first time Pinal County said, 'Uh oh,'’ Volkmer said. Elections staff initiated an in-depth investigation, Volkmer said, and ultimately reported the discrepancies to the Arizona Secretary of State's Office on Dec. 7, just after the recount began and days before Hamadeh filed his election contest on Dec. 9.”  [Arizona Daily Star, 1/6/23]

Kent Volkmer Was Told There Were 245 Uncounted Ballots But No One Told The Secretary Of State’s Office Before State Certification. “That same day, Roll called Volkmer to tell him she knew that 245 ballots had not been counted across four precincts, according to Volkmer. Despite the imminent statewide certification, Volkmer told Votebeat no one mentioned these errors to the secretary of state's office. The state then certified the results on Dec. 5 and the court ordered the statewide recount, barring county and state officials from talking about recount results. County and state officials say they took that as a gag order preventing them from talking about errors in the original count.” [Votebeat, 5/5/23]

Kent Volkmer Said The County Waited Because They Knew A Recount Would Be Ordered And Because Pinal County’s Results Were Already Certified, It Was The Only Way To Recount All Ballots. “Asked why the county did not say anything publicly or to the secretary of state's office about the errors during the short period between when Volkmer knew about them on Nov. 30 and when the gag order was issued Dec. 5, Volkmer said that county officials knew a recount would be ordered because of the tight results and because the county had already certified results officials saw it as their only real way to recount all ballots effectively. ‘We were in a difficult spot where we didn't have the ability on our own to do the recount,’ he said. If the county didn't believe a recount would happen, he said, ‘we probably would have taken a different position.’” [Votebeat, 5/5/23]

VOLKMER TOLD THE BOARD THEY MUST CERTIFY ELECTION RESULTS

Kent Volkmer Said Canvassing The Election Results Was A “Ministerial” Function That The Board Must Do And Would Not Stop Potential Legal Challenge Of The Results. “Canvassing the results is a ‘ministerial’ function the board is obligated to perform, Volkmer replied. The board has no authority to change vote totals or reject election results, according to the elections manual and state statute, he said. The secretary of state also looks at the results, and canvassing doesn't stop a potential legal challenge of the results, he said.” [Maricopa Monitor, 8/10/22]

VOLKMER DID NOT THINK STATE LAW PROHIBITED A HAND COUNT

Kent Volkmer Said He Did Not Believe Anything In Arizona Statute Prohibited A Hand Count But Did Require Election Results To Be Printed From A Tabulation Machine. “The meeting then pivoted to the legality of hand counting ballots. Rogers told the board to ‘expect’ lawsuits ‘because that’s the tenor of the times.’ But she told the board the legislature ‘will back you up,’ in any legal action. Pinal County Attorney Kent Volkmer said, in his opinion, there is nothing in statute prohibiting a hand count. But he pointed to a statute requiring election results be printed from a tabulation machine. He also referenced the Cochise County case, where an appellate court is looking at the legality of hand counts in general. A draft opinion released ahead of oral argument concluded Cochise County was within its rights to perform a 100% hand count of early ballots, but not those cast on Election Day. Volkmer predicted the final opinion ‘will likely discuss no machine tabulation,’ but he advised the board to hesitate on making any final decisions until a decision comes down from the Arizona Court of Appeals.” [Arizona Capitol Times, 8/2/23]