1.01 - Revision history

Neil thibodaux: /* June 8, 2026: Arizona State Ombudsman Replies */

2026-09-15T19:41:23Z

June 8, 2026: Arizona State Ombudsman Replies

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:41, 15 September 2026
Line 39:		Line 39:
	==== [[June 8, 2026: Arizona State Ombudsman Replies]] ====		==== [[June 8, 2026: Arizona State Ombudsman Replies]] ====
	Maricopa County's Ombudsman are ethically deficient to Arizona State Ombudsman. Maricopa County has job positions with Ombudsman in the title. However, Maricopa County Ombudsmen 1) are not trained as Ombudsman, 2) are not operating within an internationally recognized process for Ombudsman, and do not have their independence legally established by statute or county ordinance.		Maricopa County's Ombudsman are ethically deficient to Arizona State Ombudsman. Maricopa County has job positions with Ombudsman in the title. However, Maricopa County Ombudsmen 1) are not trained as Ombudsman, 2) are not operating within an internationally recognized process for Ombudsman, and do not have their independence legally established by statute or county ordinance.

			==== [[June 9, 2026: Maricopa County Ombudsman Replies]] ====
			The Maricopa County Ombudsman was not fulfilling the expected Ombudsman to listen to citizen issues and conduct an independent investigation accordingly. In this case, the Ombudsman read remail, referred the request to another department and informed Jamie of the action she had taken. Ethically, this isn't the expected response from an Ombudsman operating within the government sector.

	=== Election Anomalies ===		=== Election Anomalies ===

Neil thibodaux: /* June 8, 2026: Maricopa County's Ombudsman */

2026-09-15T17:48:55Z

June 8, 2026: Maricopa County's Ombudsman

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:48, 15 September 2026
Line 37:		Line 37:
	The Judge concurred with Maricopa County's Defense Brief, Maricopa County management avoided responsibility to doing the right-thing by claiming they were in full compliance with the law.		The Judge concurred with Maricopa County's Defense Brief, Maricopa County management avoided responsibility to doing the right-thing by claiming they were in full compliance with the law.

	==== [[June 8, 2026: ~~Maricopa County's~~ Ombudsman]] ====		==== [[June 8, 2026: Arizona State Ombudsman Replies]] ====
	Maricopa County's Ombudsman are ethically deficient to Arizona State Ombudsman. Maricopa County has job positions with Ombudsman in the title. However, Maricopa County Ombudsmen 1) are not trained as Ombudsman, 2) are not operating within an internationally recognized process for Ombudsman, and do not have their independence legally established by statute or county ordinance.		Maricopa County's Ombudsman are ethically deficient to Arizona State Ombudsman. Maricopa County has job positions with Ombudsman in the title. However, Maricopa County Ombudsmen 1) are not trained as Ombudsman, 2) are not operating within an internationally recognized process for Ombudsman, and do not have their independence legally established by statute or county ordinance.

Neil thibodaux: /* June 1, 2026: Judge's Decision */

2026-09-15T13:20:34Z

June 1, 2026: Judge's Decision

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:20, 15 September 2026
Line 36:		Line 36:
	==== [[June 1, 2026: Judge's Decision]] ====		==== [[June 1, 2026: Judge's Decision]] ====
	The Judge concurred with Maricopa County's Defense Brief, Maricopa County management avoided responsibility to doing the right-thing by claiming they were in full compliance with the law.		The Judge concurred with Maricopa County's Defense Brief, Maricopa County management avoided responsibility to doing the right-thing by claiming they were in full compliance with the law.

			==== [[June 8, 2026: Maricopa County's Ombudsman]] ====
			Maricopa County's Ombudsman are ethically deficient to Arizona State Ombudsman. Maricopa County has job positions with Ombudsman in the title. However, Maricopa County Ombudsmen 1) are not trained as Ombudsman, 2) are not operating within an internationally recognized process for Ombudsman, and do not have their independence legally established by statute or county ordinance.

	=== Election Anomalies ===		=== Election Anomalies ===

Neil thibodaux: /* March 12, 2026: Maricopa County Defense Briefing */

2026-09-15T02:51:11Z

March 12, 2026: Maricopa County Defense Briefing

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:51, 14 September 2026
Line 33:		Line 33:
	==== [[March 12, 2026: Maricopa County Defense Briefing]] ====		==== [[March 12, 2026: Maricopa County Defense Briefing]] ====
	Maricopa County management avoided responsibility to doing the right-thing by claiming they were in full compliance with the law.		Maricopa County management avoided responsibility to doing the right-thing by claiming they were in full compliance with the law.

			==== [[June 1, 2026: Judge's Decision]] ====
			The Judge concurred with Maricopa County's Defense Brief, Maricopa County management avoided responsibility to doing the right-thing by claiming they were in full compliance with the law.

	=== Election Anomalies ===		=== Election Anomalies ===

Neil thibodaux: /* June 25, 2025: Runbeck Contract Delivered */

2026-09-14T02:57:55Z

June 25, 2025: Runbeck Contract Delivered

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:57, 13 September 2026
Line 30:		Line 30:
	==== [[June 25, 2025: Runbeck Contract Delivered]] ====		==== [[June 25, 2025: Runbeck Contract Delivered]] ====
	The absence of documentation justifying the need for changes to the Runbeck contract and inconsistent approval signatures may have been ethical issues. It's difficult to ascertain given the absence of documentation. These are integrity lapses given that justification for change and approval signatures are expected in business contracts.		The absence of documentation justifying the need for changes to the Runbeck contract and inconsistent approval signatures may have been ethical issues. It's difficult to ascertain given the absence of documentation. These are integrity lapses given that justification for change and approval signatures are expected in business contracts.

			==== [[March 12, 2026: Maricopa County Defense Briefing]] ====
			Maricopa County management avoided responsibility to doing the right-thing by claiming they were in full compliance with the law.

	=== Election Anomalies ===		=== Election Anomalies ===

Neil thibodaux: /* Election Anomalies */

2026-09-11T22:46:30Z

Election Anomalies

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:46, 11 September 2026
Line 27:		Line 27:
	==== [[May 15, 2025: Let’s Play Hot Potato]] ====		==== [[May 15, 2025: Let’s Play Hot Potato]] ====
	A Maricopa County employee replied to one of Jamie's inquiries with “We have no statutory responsibility to answer your questions.” This comment would be expected from a frontline employee given that Maricopa County leadership and legal team included the following in their [[March 12, 2026: Maricopa County Defense Briefing]], "Defendants have no duty to explain." Contrary to Green Book Attribute 1.01, Maricopa County culture appears to be aligned from top to bottom. However, they are aligned to an arrogant attitude, representing poor governance and disrespect towards its citizens.		A Maricopa County employee replied to one of Jamie's inquiries with “We have no statutory responsibility to answer your questions.” This comment would be expected from a frontline employee given that Maricopa County leadership and legal team included the following in their [[March 12, 2026: Maricopa County Defense Briefing]], "Defendants have no duty to explain." Contrary to Green Book Attribute 1.01, Maricopa County culture appears to be aligned from top to bottom. However, they are aligned to an arrogant attitude, representing poor governance and disrespect towards its citizens.

			==== [[June 25, 2025: Runbeck Contract Delivered]] ====
			The absence of documentation justifying the need for changes to the Runbeck contract and inconsistent approval signatures may have been ethical issues. It's difficult to ascertain given the absence of documentation. These are integrity lapses given that justification for change and approval signatures are expected in business contracts.

	=== Election Anomalies ===		=== Election Anomalies ===

Neil thibodaux: /* November 2022: Mid-term Election */

2026-09-11T19:56:28Z

November 2022: Mid-term Election

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:56, 11 September 2026
Line 24:		Line 24:

	Katie Hobbs was serving as the Arizona Secretary of State while running for Arizona Governor during the 2022 Mid-term elections. Katie was serving an oversight role for all Arizona county elections as the Arizona Secretary of State. Relevant to this Green Book Attribute 1.01, there is an ethical question about her providing oversight for her own candidacy for Arizona Governor.		Katie Hobbs was serving as the Arizona Secretary of State while running for Arizona Governor during the 2022 Mid-term elections. Katie was serving an oversight role for all Arizona county elections as the Arizona Secretary of State. Relevant to this Green Book Attribute 1.01, there is an ethical question about her providing oversight for her own candidacy for Arizona Governor.

			==== [[May 15, 2025: Let’s Play Hot Potato]] ====
			A Maricopa County employee replied to one of Jamie's inquiries with “We have no statutory responsibility to answer your questions.” This comment would be expected from a frontline employee given that Maricopa County leadership and legal team included the following in their [[March 12, 2026: Maricopa County Defense Briefing]], "Defendants have no duty to explain." Contrary to Green Book Attribute 1.01, Maricopa County culture appears to be aligned from top to bottom. However, they are aligned to an arrogant attitude, representing poor governance and disrespect towards its citizens.

	=== Election Anomalies ===		=== Election Anomalies ===

Neil thibodaux: /* Maricopa County Directs the Use of Sharpie Pens */

2026-09-09T22:44:16Z

Maricopa County Directs the Use of Sharpie Pens

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:44, 9 September 2026
Line 54:		Line 54:
	This Green Book Attribute, 1.01, emphasizes the importance of integrity and ethics. Contrary to this attribute, the following unethical practices were revealed by Maricopa County:		This Green Book Attribute, 1.01, emphasizes the importance of integrity and ethics. Contrary to this attribute, the following unethical practices were revealed by Maricopa County:

	* Maricopa County ~~Leadership <u>direct</u><u>ed~~ the use of ''Sharpie Markers'' on Election Day~~</u>~~ contrary to their acknowledgement of issues arising from the use of Sharpie Markers, which had occurred prior to October 22, 2020.		* Maricopa County Leader directed the use of ''Sharpie Markers'' on Election Day contrary to their acknowledgement of issues arising from the use of Sharpie Markers, which had occurred prior to October 22, 2020. Maricopa County Leader asked personnel to stop using S''harpie Marker''s and use Ballpoint Pens until the Election Day in an apparent attempt to prevent premature escalation of the issue until after the election.
	* Maricopa County ~~Leadership~~ asked personnel to ~~<u>~~stop using S''harpie Marker''s and use Ballpoint Pens until the Election Day~~</u>~~ in an apparent attempt to prevent premature escalation of the issue until after the election.		* Inspectors were the target audience of this email message. The inspectors were informed of issues and concerns with Sharpie Markers. Yet, the email asked inspectors to intentionally distribute Sharpie Pens on Election Day after issues and concerns with the use of Sharpie Pens had been identified. The very people (i.e., inspectors) that should have been ensuring secure elections apparently complied with the request to distributed Sharpie Marker to voters on Election Day, even though there were know issues with Sharpie Markers. The Maricopa County Leader seeks to ensure everyone is passing out Sharpie Markers contrary to the ballot instructions. Everyone is alerted to issues and concerns with the Sharpie Markers, but apparently no one questioned their extensive use on Election Day. This email message was delivered by the Elections Department Assistant Director for Recruitment and Training. In this case, numerous temporary workers are hired for a short period of time, for the single purpose of supporting an election. The Assistant Director for Recruitment and Training would have been more influential to newly hired temporary workers. It seems odd that a staff management position (i.e., Training) would be communicating a line management decision, or what should be a line management decision.
	* Inspectors were the target audience of this email message. The email asked inspectors to intentionally distribute Sharpie Pens on Election Day ~~in the same email that had also acknowledgeed there are~~ issues with the use of Sharpie Pens ~~on ballots prior to October 22, 2020~~. The very people (i.e., inspectors) that should have been ~~directing compliance~~ with the ~~ballot instructions the use of ball point pens were being told~~ to ~~violate ballot instructions by ensuring poll workers~~ distributed Sharpie Marker to voters on Election Day, even though there were know issues with Sharpie Markers.		*An investigation into 2022 Mid-term election anomalies confirmed that Sharpie Markers bled through some ballots, which would be consistent with the reports of "issues and concerns" identified with the use of Sharpie Markers before October 22, 2020.
			*As Maricopa County tells the story, they were concerned about long lines at voting centers. Their story goes on to attribute ballot tabulator fouling as the cause of long lines; delays and long lines occurred when voting stopped to clean the tabulators. They attributed fouling of the ballot tabulator to the wet ink from ballpoint pens being transferred to the tabulator. Their solution was to distribute Sharpie Markers at the Voting Centers to the voters; Sharpie ink apparently dries faster than ballpoint pen ink. The problem with their story is that it sounds more like an excuse than a plan. If any part of their story had been documented, which showed a thoughtful investigation, then most of the public's suspicions of foul play even would have been resolved, even if the corrective action to use Sharpie Markers was wrong.

Neil thibodaux: /* Arizona Senate Allegations */

2026-09-06T23:28:09Z

Arizona Senate Allegations

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:28, 6 September 2026
Line 26:		Line 26:
	=== Election Anomalies ===		=== Election Anomalies ===

	===== Arizona ~~Senate Allegations~~ =====		===== [[Arizona Attorney General's Office 2020 Election Investigation]] =====
	This Green Book Attribute, 1.01 is an overview of Principle 1, Demonstrate Commitment to Integrity and Ethical Values.		This Green Book Attribute, 1.01 is an overview of Principle 1, Demonstrate Commitment to Integrity and Ethical Values.

Neil thibodaux: /* Maricopa County Directs the Use of Sharpie Pens */

2026-09-06T21:58:16Z

Maricopa County Directs the Use of Sharpie Pens

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:58, 6 September 2026
Line 52:		Line 52:

	===== [[2020 Maricopa County Directs Use of Sharpie Pens\|Maricopa County Directs the Use of Sharpie Pens]] =====		===== [[2020 Maricopa County Directs Use of Sharpie Pens\|Maricopa County Directs the Use of Sharpie Pens]] =====
	This Green Book Attribute, 1.01, ~~emphasis~~ the importance of integrity and ethics. Contrary to this attribute, the following unethical practices were revealed by Maricopa County:		This Green Book Attribute, 1.01, emphasizes the importance of integrity and ethics. Contrary to this attribute, the following unethical practices were revealed by Maricopa County:

	* Maricopa County Leadership <u>direct</u><u>ed the use of ''Sharpie Markers'' on Election Day</u> contrary to their acknowledgement of issues arising from the use of Sharpie Markers, which had occurred prior to October 22, 2020.		* Maricopa County Leadership <u>direct</u><u>ed the use of ''Sharpie Markers'' on Election Day</u> contrary to their acknowledgement of issues arising from the use of Sharpie Markers, which had occurred prior to October 22, 2020.
	* Maricopa County Leadership asked personnel to <u>stop using S''harpie Marker''s and use Ballpoint Pens until the Election Day</u> in an apparent attempt to prevent premature escalation of the issue until after the election.		* Maricopa County Leadership asked personnel to <u>stop using S''harpie Marker''s and use Ballpoint Pens until the Election Day</u> in an apparent attempt to prevent premature escalation of the issue until after the election.
	* Inspectors were the target audience of this email message. The email asked inspectors to intentionally distribute Sharpie Pens on Election Day in the same email that had also acknowledgeed there are issues with the use of Sharpie Pens on ballots prior to October 22, 2020. The very people (i.e., inspectors) that should have been directing compliance with the ballot instructions the use of ball point pens were being told to violate ballot instructions by ensuring poll workers distributed Sharpie Marker to voters on Election Day, even though there were know issues with Sharpie Markers.		* Inspectors were the target audience of this email message. The email asked inspectors to intentionally distribute Sharpie Pens on Election Day in the same email that had also acknowledgeed there are issues with the use of Sharpie Pens on ballots prior to October 22, 2020. The very people (i.e., inspectors) that should have been directing compliance with the ballot instructions the use of ball point pens were being told to violate ballot instructions by ensuring poll workers distributed Sharpie Marker to voters on Election Day, even though there were know issues with Sharpie Markers.