May 15, 2025: Let’s Play Hot Potato: Difference between revisions
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
=== Jamie's Public Records Request History === | === Jamie's Public Records Request History === | ||
# On April 15, 2025. Jamie submitted a single unified Public Records Request (PRR) to the Maricopa County Procurement Department, which reports to the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors (MCBOS). The Procurement Department created [[Media:2025-12-01 Court Exhibit 1.pdf|PRR 25-719]] to address Jamie's records request. | # On April 15, 2025. Jamie submitted a single unified Public Records Request (PRR) to the Maricopa County Procurement Services Department, which reports to the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors (MCBOS). The Procurement Services Department created [[Media:2025-12-01 Court Exhibit 1.pdf|PRR 25-719]] to address Jamie's records request. | ||
# On May 15, 2026, Procurement | # On May 15, 2026, Procurement transferred Jamies PRR to the Elections Department, which is still under the MCBOS. Apparently, the Procurement Department was unable to fulfill the remaining records on the PRR. Elections Department created PRR 25-139t. No records were supplied to Jamie by the Elections Department. Instead, the Elections Department reassigned the records request to the Information Governance Department. | ||
# Later in the afternoon on May 15, 2026, Elections Department transferred Jamie's original PRR to Governance Department, which is still under the MCBOS. The Governance Department created PRR 25-1123 after receiving the unfulfilled records request from the Elections Department. Again, no records were supplied to the Jamie by the Information Governance Department. Instead, the | # Later in the afternoon on the same day, May 15, 2026, Elections Department transferred Jamie's original PRR to the Information Governance Department, which is still under the MCBOS. The Information Governance Department created PRR 25-1123 after receiving the unfulfilled records request from the Elections Department. Again, no records were supplied to the Jamie by the Information Governance Department. Instead, the | ||
# | # By June 1, 2025,the Procurement Department supplied Jamie with two contracts for [[June 25, 2025: Runbeck Contract Delivered|Runbeck Election Services, Inc]] and two contracts for [[June 25, 2025: Dominion Contract Delivered|Dominion Voting Systems, Inc.]] The Procurement Department then transferred the plaintiffs request to the Elections Department to address requests that had not yet been fulfilled. These were the only two records from Jamie's original PRR that were delivered. | ||
# On June 24, 2025, MCRO's PRR 25-64 was closed and inappropriately claimed all records had been provided | # On June 11, 2025, the Information Governance Department reassigned the Jamie's records request to the Maricopa County Recorder’s Office (MCRO). The MCRO is a separate Maricopa County government entity and does not report to the MCBOS. MCRO created PRR 25-64 after receiving the unfulfilled records request from the Information Governance Department. The MC Recorder’s Office did not provide the plaintiff any records. | ||
# On June 24, 2025, MCRO's PRR 25-64 was closed and inappropriately claimed all records had been provided | |||
# | # | ||
# T | # T | ||
# | # | ||
Revision as of 11:43, 11 September 2026
This is not ready for proofreading.
You are here: Poor Governance Data; Poor Governance Examples; Jamie's Example; May 15, 2025: Let's Play Hot Potatoe
The next part of Jamie's Story is June 25, 2025 Runbeck Contract Delivered
This page will summarize how my P??????
Jamie's Timeline
- 2020: General Election Anomalies — Maricopa County has numerous election anaomalies
- 2021: My Journey Begins — Starting to ask questions about lessons learned
- November 2022: Ethical Issues with Katie Hobbs Overseeing Her Own Election — As Arizona S.O.S., Katie Hobbs oversaw her own election
- December 2024: Gaining Support — [My action; PPP Resolution Approved; no governance gaps]
- April 15, 2025: Public Records Request — [My action; no governance gaps]
- May 15, 2025: Let’s Play Hot Potato — Public Records Request runaround
- June 25, 2025: Runbeck Contract Delivered - Responsive Record Delivered by Procurement
- June 25, 2025: Dominion Contract Delivered - Responsive Record Delivered by Procurement
- July 25, 2025; Still Gaining Support - [My action; Another PPP Resolution Approved; no new governance gaps]
- November 20, 2025: Debbie Lesko Presentation - Explains Recent Lost Ballots
- December 1, 2025: Special Complaint File with Court - [My action; no new governance gaps]
- January 24, 2026, Broadening the Support - [My action; PPP Resolution Approved; no new governance gaps]
- February 23, 2026: Plaintiff's Briefing - [My action; I filed a brief with the court; no new governance gaps]
- March 12, 2026: Maricopa County Defense Briefing - Maricopa County Legal Team's Defense Brief
- April 3,, 2026, Plaintiff's Response to the Defense Briefing - [My action; no new governance gaps]
- April 15, 2026, Evidentiary Hearing Set - Judge requires additional information before a final decision is made.
- June 1, 2026: Judge's Decision - Judge Rules in Favor of the County
- June 8, 2026: Arizona State Ombudsman Replies - Representative from the Arizona Ombudsman Citizens's Aid agency
- June 9, 2026: Maricopa County Ombudsman Replies - MC response was consistent with Arizona Ombudsman's expectations
- August 3, 2026: Submitted Complaint — Formal complaint submitted & response was as expected.
Let's Listen to Beau Johnson's Story
In many ways, Beau Johnson's story on the internet matched Jamie's experience. She was getting the runaround from Maricopa county.
Click here to listen to another citizen, Beau Johnson, explain how accountability is missing in his local government:
https://www.facebook.com/reel/2184592982102472
Jamie's Public Records Request History
- On April 15, 2025. Jamie submitted a single unified Public Records Request (PRR) to the Maricopa County Procurement Services Department, which reports to the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors (MCBOS). The Procurement Services Department created PRR 25-719 to address Jamie's records request.
- On May 15, 2026, Procurement transferred Jamies PRR to the Elections Department, which is still under the MCBOS. Apparently, the Procurement Department was unable to fulfill the remaining records on the PRR. Elections Department created PRR 25-139t. No records were supplied to Jamie by the Elections Department. Instead, the Elections Department reassigned the records request to the Information Governance Department.
- Later in the afternoon on the same day, May 15, 2026, Elections Department transferred Jamie's original PRR to the Information Governance Department, which is still under the MCBOS. The Information Governance Department created PRR 25-1123 after receiving the unfulfilled records request from the Elections Department. Again, no records were supplied to the Jamie by the Information Governance Department. Instead, the
- By June 1, 2025,the Procurement Department supplied Jamie with two contracts for Runbeck Election Services, Inc and two contracts for Dominion Voting Systems, Inc. The Procurement Department then transferred the plaintiffs request to the Elections Department to address requests that had not yet been fulfilled. These were the only two records from Jamie's original PRR that were delivered.
- On June 11, 2025, the Information Governance Department reassigned the Jamie's records request to the Maricopa County Recorder’s Office (MCRO). The MCRO is a separate Maricopa County government entity and does not report to the MCBOS. MCRO created PRR 25-64 after receiving the unfulfilled records request from the Information Governance Department. The MC Recorder’s Office did not provide the plaintiff any records.
- On June 24, 2025, MCRO's PRR 25-64 was closed and inappropriately claimed all records had been provided
- T
- The
- File:2025-12-01 Court Exhibit 1.pdf
- File:2025-12-01 Court Exhibit 2.pdf
- File:2025-12-01 Court Exhibit 3.pdf
- File:2025-12-01 Court Exhibit 4.pdf
- File:2025-12-01 Court Exhibit 5.pdf
- File:2025-12-01 Court Exhibit 6A.pdf
- File:2025-12-01 Court Exhibit 6B.pdf
- April 15, 2025 - Original Public Records Request - Exhibit 1
- May 15, 2025 - Information Governance Transfer - Exhibit 5
- May 15, 2025 - Recorder's Office Acknowledges Statutory Requirements - Exhibit 3
- June 9, 2025 - Jamie clarifies PRR in email - Exhibit 6A
- June 11, 2025 - Elections Denies all Records - Exhibit 4
- June 13, 2025 - Voice Mail Follow Up - Exhibit 6B
- June 24, 2025 - Recorder Closes PRR - Exhibit 2
On “May 15, 2025” the defendant acknowledges the scope of PRR 25-64 by stating the following:
”Please provide the following records and explanations for the 2020 election, as required by A.R.S. § 39-121 (public records access):
2. A.R.S. § 16-161 (Voter Registration Records): • Reports submitted to the Secretary of State on voters registered without proof of citizenship, including ballots cast for federal offices only, per § 16-168(G).
3. A.R.S. § 16-121 (Voter List Maintenance): • Processes and reports used to maintain accurate voter lists, ensuring only eligible voters were included.
4. A.R.S. § 16-165 (Deceased Record Checks): • Records of checks to remove deceased voters from rolls, including any identified failures and corrective actions.
5. A.R.S. § 16-166 (Voter Registration Reporting): • Documentation of voter registration data reported to the Secretary of State, including compliance with federal form requirements.”
On “May 15, 2025,” the defendant acknowledges
On “June 24, 2025,” the plaintiff submitted a “Formal Escalation and Demand for Action”
On “June 24, 2025” the plaintiff reiterates the applicable statutes associated with the PPR with the following statement:
“Note: Submitting multiple formal requests under A.R.S. § 39-121 (Key Points:
· It affirms that public records are open to inspection by any person, unless specifically exempt by law.
· It applies to all state and local government agencies, including counties, departments, and elected officials.
· It does not require the requester to explain why they want the records.
· Agencies must respond promptly and cannot delay access unreasonably."
On “June 27, 2025,” the defendant closed this PRR by explaining “All records have been released, and your request has been fulfilled.” Seemingly inconsistent with the first statement, the defendant continues by stating “We have no statutory responsibility to answer your questions.”
Old stuff- may be deleted.
On May 15, 2025, MCBOS Procurement Department reassigned my PRR my original request (PRR 2025-719) to Information Governance Department as PRR 2025-1123. This department then reassigned PRR 2025-1123 to the Elections Department as PRR 2025-139. The Elections Department then transferred PRR 2025-139 to the Maricopa County Recorder’s Office as PRR 2025-64.
I tried to resolve my concerns with email and phone conversations from representatives in each of these departments. Unfortunately, no additional records were provided beyond what was delivered shortly after the initial records request of April 2025.
On June 11, 2025, the Elections Department stated it had no responsive records. On June 27, 2025, the Maricopa County Recorder’s Office closed its request by stating records had been released and asserting no statutory obligation to respond. No single department was responsible for my PRR. Instead, each department determined if there was anything they could do to respond to my PRR, which resulted in no action from three of the assigned departments.
Neil Thibodaux reached out to me in November of 2025 for the purpose of gaining additional insights into the resolution that I had authored in 2024 and was resubmitting for 2026 approval. Neil had retired from the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station and was familiar with their Corrective Action Program, which was required by 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion XVI, Corrective Actions. He could see how a CAP program could improve County performance. From that point forward, we have been collaborating to bring attention to Maricopa County performance gaps that could be resolved through CAP.
Maricopa County was unable to provide the following records, which I had requested:
- Amendments, addenda, renewals, exhibits, or revisions for 2018–2024
- Post-election contract administration records
- MVD election-related contracts
- USPS-related agreements
- Temporary staffing contracts for signature verification
I eventually sought judicial relief. On December 1, 2025, I filed special complaint CV2025 – 063720, which was processed by the Superior Court of Arizona in Maricopa County. This complaint was submitted pursuant to A.R.S. § 39-121 et seq. Five defendants were named in this complaint, which included the following:
- Maricopa County Board of Supervisors (MCBOS)
- MCBOS Procurement Department
- MCBOS Information Governance Department
- MCBOS Elections Department
- Maricopa County Recorder’s Office (MCRO)
The defendants were named in accordance with the agencies the County determined needed to address my PRR. My PRR was routed to all of these agencies and they were unable to resolve my request for additional records or provide a complete explanation of the documents provided.
I referenced applicable Arizona Revised Statutes (A.R.S.), which stated the records Arizona counties were required to preserve for public inspection in my plaintiff’s brief. Five defendants (government entities or agencies) were named, which reflected the multiple handoffs of my PRR. No one government entity took responsibility for resolving my concern.
In January 2026, the Executive Guidance Committee for the Maricopa County Republican Committee re-approved the same resolution that had been submitted in December 2024, Public-Private Partnership (PPP) Contracts Must Be Open and as Transparent, Subject to Public Oversight, Audits, and Corrective Action Plans,
The judge ruled in favor of Maricopa County, the defendant. He ruled that the County had delivered all the relevant records based on affidavits and testimony provided by the Maricopa County Staff. The issue of whether other documents and records should have been available and provided in accordance with Arizona statutes was not addressed in the ruling.
[include the discussion with Jen, direction to file a complaint, frustration finding the complaint, Jen sent a link to file a complaint, research of complaints, end with why we selected James Taylor as the ideal representative to hear our proposal]
