When a Tucson man and his organization filed a public records request with Santa Cruz County for copies of voting records for the 2022 primary, the county denied the request.
But they didn’t stop there. Santa Cruz County has since sued the man and his group to prevent them from challenging the decision.
A Pima County judge said John Blakey and his organization, AUDIT USA, have the right to oppose the dismissal of records if they so choose, when they dismissed the lawsuit on Tuesday. A bold and potentially dangerous precedent-setting move has been stopped halfway.
Pima County Superior Court Judge Casey McGinley argued that no malice was found behind the county’s lawsuit, but noted a potentially problematic concept underlying the lawsuit.
“A country decides to sue a private entity for fear that one day it may ask for public records they are unwilling to provide, whether it be an individual or a group of people. What can I do to stop it?” he asked county attorneys, according to a transcript of the lawsuit Blakey provided.
“We can all imagine that if counties and other government officials were able to sue for declaratory relief in response to public record requests, very dire scenarios could occur. I think we can,” McGinley said at another point.
The judge noted that there are clear procedures for public records requests. If the public makes a request, the county decides how to respond, and the requester does not like the response, they can file a special action request. with the county court.
So far, however, Blakey and AUDIT USA have not sought a specific case in Santa Cruz County Superior Court, so there have been no legal disputes for a judge to decide.
Blakey’s attorney, Bill Lisner, said AUDIT USA has limited resources and is focused on obtaining an appeals court to overturn a decision in a losing record case in Maricopa, so his client said it did not intend to seek special action in the incident. county.
McGinley’s ruling Tuesday did not address Blakey’s cast voting record, or whether Santa Cruz County was right in denying CRV’s request. Still, county attorney Christina Estes-Werther acknowledged that other counties considered their CRVs public records.
“County, Santa Cruz is one of the few counties that they (AUDIT USA) probably haven’t disclosed that they have a target behind them to make sure they need this for the organization’s mission. I believe,” she said.
Regarding the issue of precedent, Estes-Werther argued that the county’s lawsuit was a specific response to this particular organization, and she called it a lawsuit and not a threat to other members of the public.
Still, as the judge said, “Ball is in the court of Mr. Blakey and AUDIT USA, whether or not they want to file a special action petition,” he said, adding that the county would weaken its choice of action. dismissed the lawsuit.
The Santa Cruz County lawsuit was filed in Pima County, home of Blakey and AUDIT USA. On Wednesday, the day after McGinley’s ruling, the county filed a petition for reconsideration in Pima County Superior Court.
If Santa Cruz County has any reason to fear a challenge from Blakey and his organization, it may be because they lost to him earlier and were named AUDIT AZ in 2014.
In that case, AUDIT AZ filed a special action request in the Santa Cruz County Superior Court to force the county to turn over official documents that the group claims were wrongfully withheld. After a three-day trial, a judge ruled that the county was not taking her AUDIT AZ records request seriously and ordered her to comply.
When the county stalled, Judge Protem Kimberly-Corsaro ordered AUDIT AZ to pay Santa Cruz County $30,000 in attorney fees, $1,744 in fees, and $6,000 in appraiser fees.
