1 Bryan James Blehm (AZ Bar #023891)

BLEHM LAW PLLC

2
10869 N. Scottsdale Rd., Suite 103-256
3 Scottsdale, Arizona 85254
(602) 753-6213
4
bryan@blehmlegal.com
5
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
6
7
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA
8
IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF MARICOPA
9
10 WE THE PEOPLE ARIZONA ) NO. ________________________
ALLIANCE, an Arizona Non-Profit )
11 Corporation, )
) VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR
12 ) STATUTORY SPECIAL ACTION TO
Plaintiff, ) SECURE ACCESS TO PUBLIC
13 ) RECORDS FROM DEFENDANTS
)
14 vs. )
)
15 STEPHEN RICHER, in his official )
capacity as the Maricopa County )
16 )
Recorder; REY VALENZUELA, in his )
17 official capacity as the Maricopa County )
Director of Elections for Election )
18 )
Services and Early Voting; SCOTT )
19 JARRETT, in his official capacity as the )
20 Maricopa County Director of Elections ))
for Election Day and Emergency Voting; )
21 MARICOPA COUNTY RECORDERS )
OFFICE; MARICOPA COUNTY )
22 )
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: )
23 ELECTIONS DIVISION, a Maricopa )
County political subdivision; BILL )
24 )
GATES, in his individual and official )
25 capacity as a Member of the Board of )
Supervisors; CLINT HICKMAN, in his )
26 )
individual and official capacity as a )
27 Member of the Board of Supervisors; )
JACK SELLERS, in his individual and )
28 )
1
 official capacity as a Member of the )
1 )
Board of Supervisors; THOMAS )
2 GALVIN, in his individual and official )
capacity as a Member of the Board of )
3 )
Supervisors; AND STEVE )
4 GALLARDO, in his individual and )
official capacity as a Member of the )
5 )
Board of Supervisors; et al. )
6
Defendants.
7
8 We The People Arizona Alliance (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) hereby submits this
9 Verified Complaint for Statutory Special Action to Secure Access to Public Records
10 pursuant to A.R.S. § 39-121, et seq., and Ariz. R. Special Actions 1-6, and allege as
11 follows:
12 SUMMARY OF THE CASE
13 1. Plaintiff has requested from Defendants public records relating to the
14 inspection of all 2022 General Election Ballot Affidavit Envelopes, including mail-in,
15 early voting and late early ballot envelopes.
16 2. It should be undisputed that the documents and information sought by
17 Plaintiff are public records. Defendants have failed to produce or make such records
18 available for inspection promptly, thereby disregarding their statutory obligations under
19 Arizona’s Public Records Act.
20 3. Upon information and belief, Maricopa County Recorder and the Maricopa
21 County Elections Department actively participated in the collection, inspection, counting,
22 supervision, administration, and retention of the 2022 General Election Ballot Affidavit
23 Envelopes.
24 4. Because the Maricopa County Recorders Office and the Maricopa County
25 Elections Department have definitively stated that they have no intention of producing
26 these public records to Plaintiff, Plaintiff lacks an equally plain, speedy, and adequate
27
28

2
 1 remedy at law, and special action relief is necessary to ensure that the Defendants
2 discharge the nondiscretionary duties imposed upon them by Arizona law.
3 JURISDICTION
4 5. This Court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to Article 6, § 14 of
5 the Arizona Constitution, A.R.S. §§ 12-2021, 39-121.02, and Arizona Rule of Special
6 Action Procedure 4.
7 6. Venue lies in Maricopa County pursuant to Arizona Rule of Special
8 Action Procedure 4(b) and pursuant to A.R.S. § 12-401(16) because the Defendants hold
9 office in that county.
10 PARTIES
11 7. Plaintiff, We The People Arizona Alliance, is an Arizona non-profit
12 corporation.
13 8. By Arizona Statute and case law, Plaintiff may request to examine or be
14 furnished copies of any public record, and public officers and public bodies are required
15 to furnish copies of such records in a prompt manner. A.R.S. §§ 39-121.01(D)(1) and
16 (E).
17 9. Defendant Stephen Richer is the Recorder of Maricopa County and is
18 named in this action in his official capacity only. As the officer in charge of elections in
19 Maricopa County, Defendant Richer is responsible for overseeing the retention of all
20 election ballot affidavit envelopes as well as all procedures for retention of all evidence
21 of said envelopes. Defendant Stephen Richer is an “officer” within the meaning of
22 A.R.S. § 39-121.01(A)(1). Upon information and belief, the County Recorder has
23 custody, and is responsible for the preservation, maintenance, and care, of some or all
24 the public records requested by Plaintiff.
25 10. Defendant Rey Valenzuela is the Director of Elections for Election
26 Services and Early Voting in Maricopa County and is named in this action in his official
27 capacity only. Director Valenzuela is an “officer” within the meaning of A.R.S. § 39-
28 121.01(A)(1). Upon information and belief, Director Valenzuela has custody, and is
3
 1 responsible for the preservation, maintenance, and care, of some or all the public records
2 requested by Plaintiff.
3 11. Defendant Scott Jarrett is the Director of Elections for Election Day and
4 Emergency Voting in Maricopa County and is named in this action in his official
5 capacity only. Director Jarrett is an “officer” within the meaning of A.R.S. § 39-
6 121.01(A)(1). Upon information and belief, Director Jarrett has custody, and is
7 responsible for the preservation, maintenance, and care, of some or all the public records
8 requested by Plaintiff.
9 12. Maricopa County is a political subdivision of the State of Arizona.
10 Maricopa County is charged by law with various duties under the Public Records Act
11 and charged by law with retaining and overseeing the retention of all election ballot
12 affidavit envelopes as well as all procedures for retention of all evidence of said
13 envelopes. See A.R.S. §§ 11-251(3) and (30), 16-531, and 16-532; Elections Procedure
14 Manual at pp. 68–69. The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors, in its entirety and
15 individual supervisors, Bill Gates, Clint Hickman, Jack Sellers, Thomas Galvin and
16 Steve Gallardo, are a “public body” within the meaning of A.R.S. § 39-121.01(A)(2).
17 Upon information and belief, the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors, individual
18 supervisors, Bill Gates, Clint Hickman, Jack Sellers, Thomas Galvin and Steve Gallardo
19 have custody, and responsible for the preservation, maintenance and care, of some or all
20 the public records requested by Plaintiffs and its members are likewise sued here in their
21 official capacities. By law, Defendants “shall maintain all records . . . reasonably
22 necessary or appropriate to maintain an accurate knowledge of their official activities
23 and of any of their activities which are supported by monies from the state or any
24 political subdivision of the state.” A.R.S. 39-121.01(B).
25 13. Defendants also deny Plaintiff access on a “best interests of the state
26 exception.”
27
28

4
 1 FACTS
2 14. On April 5, 2023, Plaintiff WE THE PEOPLE sent a public records
3 request to Defendants according to A.R.S. § 39-121 et seq. A copy of said request is
4 attached herewith as Exhibit A.
5 15. On April 10, 2023, the Public Records Custodian responded to Plaintiff
6 WE THE PEOPLE’s request by stating, “pursuant to A.R.S. 16-168(F) and in the best
7 interest of the state exception to the Public Records Act, the Recorder’s Office is
8 denying your request.” A copy is attached hereto as Exhibit B.
9 16. To this day, the Maricopa County has failed to comply with all requests,
10 including providing the documents sought by this Public Records Request.
11 COUNT I
12 Special Action Relief to Compel Immediate Production of Public Records
13 (A.R.S. § 39-121, et seq.)
14 17. Plaintiff incorporates by reference the foregoing allegations as if fully set
15 forth herein.
16 18. Defendants, individual and collectively, are required by law to preserve
17 and maintain all records “reasonably necessary or appropriate to maintain an accurate
18 knowledge of their official activities and of any of their activities that are supported by
19 public monies from this state or any political subdivision of this state.” Id.
20 19. Defendants are required by law to produce or make available such public
21 records to “any person” upon request. See A.R.S. § 39-121.
22 20. A public records request need not be presented in any particular format or
23 utilize any specific verbiage. See A.R.S. § 39-121.01(D)(1).
24 21. The Public Records Request requires “the prompt and actual production of
25 the documents” sought by a public records request. Phoenix New Times, L.L.C. v.
26 Arpaio, 217 Ariz. 533, 538, ¶ 12 (App. 2008).
27
28

5
 1 22. An officer or public body acts “promptly” when the officer or body is
2 “quick to act” or “produc[es] the requested records ‘without delay.’” Am. Civil Liberties
3 Union v. Ariz. Dept. of Child Safety, 240 Ariz. 142, 152, ¶ 32 (App. 2016).
4 23. The officer or public body from whom public records are requested has the
5 burden of proving that the response was “prompt given the circumstances surrounding
6 each request.” Phoenix New Times, 217 Ariz. At 538-39, ¶ 15.
7 24. Undue delay in the fulfillment of a public records request constitutes a
8 denial of access to the requested records. See Phoenix New Times, 217 Ariz. At 547, ¶
9 51.
10 25. A person who has been denied access to requested public records “may
11 appeal the denial through a special action in the superior court.” A.R.S. § 39-121.02(A).
12 26. A court in a special action proceeding may compel a public officer “to
13 perform a duty required by law as to which has no discretion.” Ariz. R. Proc. Special
14 Actions (“RPSA”) 3(a); see also A.R.S. § 12-2021.
15 27. All of the documents and information sought by Plaintiff are “public
16 records” subject to mandatory and prompt disclosure under the Public Records Act
17 because they have “substantial nexus” to the Defendants’ official duties and activities in
18 connection with the conduct and administration of elections in Maricopa County. See
19 Griffis v. Pinal County, 215 Ariz. 1, 4, ¶ 10 (2007).
20 28. Defendants denied Plaintiff access to the ballot affidavit envelopes on the
21 basis that they are protected by A.R.S. § 16-168(F). As a reportorial agency that strives
22 to reduce governmental corruption through increased public transparency and public
23 accountability. Plaintiff seeks to inspect the affidavit under a statutory exemption, which
24 broadly include “the voter, by an authorized government official in the scope of the
25 official's duties, for any purpose by an entity designated by the secretary of state as a
26 voter registration agency pursuant to the national voter registration act of 1993 . . ., for
27 signature verification on petitions and candidate filings, for election purposes and
28 for news gathering purposes by a person engaged in newspaper, radio, television or
6
 1 reportorial work, or connected with or employed by a newspaper, radio or television
2 station or pursuant to a court order. Notwithstanding any other law, a voter's e-mail
3 address may not be released for any purpose. Id. (emphasis added). Unlike the absolute
4 prohibition on release of ballots and ballot images by A.R.S. § 16-625, A.R.S. § 16-
5 168(F) offers a wide range of exemptions, including highly partisan groups currently
6 allowed access to the voter registration database by the Secretary of State, including
7 Arizona Center for Disability Law, Arizona Student Association, Chicanos Por La Causa,
8 Equality Arizona Foundation, Inspire2Vote – Project High Hopes, Mi Familia Vota, One
9 Arizona, Phoenix Indian Center, Rock the Vote, and The Civics Center.
10 29. Defendants also denied Plaintiff access based on an undisclosed “best
11 interest of the state” exception. Here, the best interests of the state cannot be defined as
12 preventing a Plaintiff from discovering the use of fraudulent signatures in the vote by
13 mail process.
14 30. The affidavit envelopes are also not entitled to any privacy protections
15 simply because they contain a signature. The individual signing the affidavit knowingly
16 and intentionally signs the outside of the envelope before depositing that envelope into
17 the stream of commerce. During its travels to Maricopa County, the affidavit envelope
18 is handled by an unknown number of the public, including postal workers, private
19 citizens, and employees of Runbeck, a private corporation retained to process and
20 perform signature verification on affidavit envelopes.
21 31. Upon information and belief, there are public records in the Defendants’
22 custody that are responsive to Plaintiff’s Public Records Request.
23 32. Defendants have a nondiscretionary statutory duty to promptly produce or
24 make available to Plaintiff all public records sought in its Public Records Request.
25 33. To date, Defendants have produced no documents related to Plaintiff’s
26 Public Records Request.
27 34. Defendants’ failure to promptly produce the requested documents and
28 information constitutes an effective denial of access to public records and prevents
7
 1 Plaintiffs from monitoring election activity in Maricopa County, the most populace
2 county in Arizona.
3 35. Plaintiff is accordingly entitled to a writ of mandamus or other relief
4 compelling the immediate and full production of the requested public records.
5 PRAYER FOR RELIEF
6 Wherefore, Plaintiff prays for the following relief from this Court:
7 A. A writ of mandamus or other order requiring Defendants to immediately
8 produce or make available to Plaintiff all public records requested by its Public Records
9 Request;
10 B. Should Defendants claim the public records are in the possession of the
11 County Treasurer, an order requiring the County Treasurer to open the vault to allow
12 Defendants access to retrieve the records;
13 C. An award of reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs pursuant to A.R.S. §§ 12-
14 431, 12-348, 12-2030, 39-121.02(B), the private attorney general doctrine, and other
15 applicable law; and
16 D. For such other relief as the Court deems just and proper.
17 DATED this _____ day of April, 2023.
18
BRYAN JAMES BLEHM
19
20
By _____________________________
21 Blehm Law PLLC
10869 N. Scottsdale Rd., Suite 103-256
22
Scottsdale, Arizona 85254
23 Attorney for Plaintiffs
24
25
26
27
28