It's too hot to play outside. I found an interesting thing online to occupy some time with and hopefully, get me further down the rabbit hole. I've not used this option and thought maybe someone would like to join me. The link I share will be to an open spreadsheet report on maricopa.opengov.com
Check it out they have two contract numbers too . Both have the same name "Printing and distribution of ballots" but one contract name is in all caps like Dominions two contracts.
I think it's safe to say the name of contract number 15057Cl is ELECTION EQUIPMENT SOFTWARE and the name of contract number190265 is Elections Tabulation System
The vender number for Dominion pulled up the dzata in this report. It appears that Dominion has two contract numbers with Maricopa County. One contract number is the same as Request for Proposals (RFP)190265 the county put out and its updates for the new Tabulation machines and software. dating back prior to 2010. Which begs the question why did the County use that number to solicit new proposals when Dominion already had a contract with that number?The other contract number 15057Cl the report shows for this vender number begs even more questions.....Like why is that contract number not in the County's records?
Just for fun I searched on payee name, Runbeck here is the link to that https://maricopa.opengov.com/transparency#/33714/query=0797DF8DF269E49C5AD5F27076BC33F1&embed=n
Check it out they have two contract numbers too . Both have the same name "Printing and distribution of ballots" but one contract name is in all caps like Dominions two contracts.
I think it's safe to say the name of contract number 15057Cl is ELECTION EQUIPMENT SOFTWARE and the name of contract number190265 is Elections Tabulation System
The vender number for Dominion pulled up the dzata in this report. It appears that Dominion has two contract numbers with Maricopa County. One contract number is the same as Request for Proposals (RFP)190265 the county put out and its updates for the new Tabulation machines and software. dating back prior to 2010. Which begs the question why did the County use that number to solicit new proposals when Dominion already had a contract with that number?The other contract number 15057Cl the report shows for this vender number begs even more questions.....Like why is that contract number not in the County's records?