Established Fact
Arizona jurisdictions, led by Maricopa County, accepted CTCL grants that were disproportionately concentrated in Democratic‑leaning areas, with funds used for drop‑box deployment, satellite offices, and targeted voter‑outreach infrastructure. These privately steered operational choices shifted the geographic pattern of convenient voting access in ways that aligned with one party’s base rather than neutral administrative criteria.
Citations
Capital Research Center, “UPDATED: Shining a Light on Zuck Bucks in the 2020 Battleground States” (updated Dec. 31, 2021), https://capitalresearch.org/article/shining-a-light-on-zuck-bucks-in-key-states/. (Documents Arizona jurisdictions led by Maricopa County accepted CTCL grants totaling ~$5.1 million; Biden-won counties received 75.5% ($3.9 million) vs. only 13% to Trump-won counties, with per-capita averages of $5.83 in Biden counties vs. $1.29 in Trump counties—explicitly “disproportionately concentrated in Democratic-leaning areas.” Maricopa alone received $1.84–$3 million.)
Foundation for Government Accountability, “How ‘Zuckerbucks’ Infiltrated and Influenced the 2020 Election in Arizona” (March 12, 2021), https://thefga.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Arizona-Zuckerbucks-brief-3-12-21.pdf (pp. 2–4). (Confirms funds were used for “get-out-the-vote efforts, voter education,” vehicles/advertising, “additional capacity to increase voter education efforts,” and infrastructure expansions in recipient counties; Maricopa received over half of Arizona’s total and saw targeted deployments reshaping operations in its heavily Democratic precincts.)
Ballotpedia, “Center for Tech and Civic Life’s (CTCL) grants to election agencies, 2020” (updated post-2020 disclosures), https://ballotpedia.org/Center_for_Tech_and_Civic_Life%27s_(CTCL)_grants_to_election_agencies,_202 0. (Lists exact Arizona grants: Maricopa $1,840,345; Pima $950,446; Coconino $524,585; etc.; purposes explicitly include “polling place rental” (satellite offices/centers), “equipment to process ballots/applications” (enabling drop-box deployment), “temporary staffing,” and “nonpartisan voter education”/targeted outreach infrastructure.)
Capital Research Center, “How CTCL Helped Biden in Arizona and Nevada” (Jan. 22, 2021), https://capitalresearch.org/article/how-ctcl-helped-biden-in-arizona-and-nevada/. (Details Maricopa County’s grant (~$3 million) funded infrastructure and outreach that “greased the skids for voter turnout” in the state’s largest Democratic-leaning population center; CTCL-funded counties accounted for 92.5% of Biden’s Arizona votes, with Biden turnout up 81% vs. Trump’s 66% in those jurisdictions—consistent with privately steered access changes favoring one base.)
Id. at Capital Research Center “Shining a Light” (supra note 1); see also FGA Arizona brief (supra note 2) at pp. 3–5. (The privately designed/steered CTCL deployments—drop boxes, satellite polling infrastructure, and targeted outreach—shifted geographic access patterns in Democratic-leaning areas [e.g., Maricopa flipped to Biden while receiving the largest grant]; Biden-won counties saw Democratic vote increases of 36–48% vs. far lower gains in non-funded Democratic areas, demonstrating non-neutral optimization aligned with one party’s base rather than uniform administrative criteria.)