SM
SM
Financial Reporting, Campaign Contributor Search Web page permits search by contributor's name. Government officers often contribute. The Web page leads to PDF files which include contributor's home address.
There is a database: Arizona Government Officres' Name, Job Title, Agency, Pay.
We supply some examples of that Web site's information below under correction.
AG spokeswoman Andrea Esquer. 2006oct22
ANDREA M ESQUER Born 1966, 1720 PALMCROFT DR, 05/20/2003, TEMPE, AZ 85282
This property may have been owned by her relatives.
Parcel #: 133-31-185
Subdivision Name: HUGHES ACRES 7
MCR #: 11642 Lot #: 904
Property Address: 1720 E PALMCROFT DR,
TEMPE 85282
Property Description: HUGHES ACRES 7
Section Township Range: 26 1N 4E
Parcel #: 305-01-027 Subdivision Name: KNOELL TEMPE 6
MCR #: 15744 Lot #: 1075
Property Address: 2039 E RICE DR,
TEMPE 85283
Property Description: KNOELL TEMPE UNIT 6
Section Township Range: 1 1S 4E Associated Parcel:
Owner: ESQUER ANDREA M
Mailing Address: 2039 E RICE DR,
TEMPE AZ 85283 USA
Deed #: 060241688, Sales Price: n/a,
Deed Date: 2/22/2006, Sales Date: n/a.
Property Use Code: 0131 0131 0131
Tax Area Code: 031608 031608 031608
Square Feet of Living Space: 1,652
Improvement Quality Grade: R-3
Lot Square Footage: 7,619
Market Area/Neighborhood: 02/007
Covered Parking: 2 Car Garage
Unique Location Characteristics: None
Construction Year: 1974
Pool Square Footage:
Number of Patios: 1
Bath Fixtures: 6
Patio Type: Slab
Cooling: Refrigeration
Exterior Walls: 8" Painted Block
Heating: Yes
Roof Type: Asphalt Shingle
Physical Condition: Average
real estate, tax year 2006, Open - CTX $1,277.40
Fidelity National Title warranty deed notarized 14 February 2006 by Leslie [illegible middle initial] Henley. Many jurisdictions will not record a deed if the notarization is illegible. (The rejected deed is mailed back to the filer with a brief note explaining why the deed was rejected.) In our opinion, if one looks at the notary seal alone (which is on page two of the deed, according to URL http://recorder.maricopa.gov/recdocdata/UnofficialDocs.asp?rec=20060241688&pg=2&cls=RecorderDocuments&suf=&sar=UnOfficial&bid=&naf=1&bk=0&rec2=&pgs=&map=&bdt=01/01/1900&edt=10/22/2006&nm=&set=20&cde=&lnk=0&Pages=3), the notary's name is illegible, thus rendering the notary seal inadequate to support recordation. Even if one looks at everything on page two, the notary's middle initial is illegible. One should not have to guess or suppose what the middle initial is. In our opinion, that illegibility may posibly disqualify the deed from being accepted for recordation by many of America's recorders. It is conceivable that Arizona state or Maricopa county may have different or relatively low standards for deciding what's acceptable for recordation. We guess that it's conceivable that, when the Maricopa county recorder's staff saw who the grantee was (namely, the AG's spokeswoman), a decision was made not to antagonize her by rejecting her deed. We are not expert in Arizona recordation law.
This property may recently have been owned by her relatives.
Parcel #: 301-01-723, Subdivision Name: COLONIA DEL SUR UNIT 4 AMD,
MCR #: 15043 Lot #: 198.
Property Address: 5366 S COUNTRY CLUB WY,
TEMPE 85283
Property Description: COLONIA DEL SUR UNIT FOUR AMD.
attorney general Samuel Pearson "Terry" Goddard, III. 2006oct22.
Childhood in Tuscon. His father was a governor. Terry was mayor of Phoenix. He is married to Monica Lee. They have a son.
TERRY GODDARD Born Sep 1948, 503 PORTLAND ST, PHOENIX (Maricopa County?), AZ 85003 (602) 253-0497.
Parcel #: 111-32-010
Subdivision Name: KENILWORTH BLKS 1-6
MCR #: 839 Lot #: 10
Property Address: 503 W PORTLAND ST,
PHOENIX 85003
Property Description: KENILWORTH
Section Township Range: 5 1N 3E
Owner: GODDARD SAMUEL P III/[and another]
Mailing Address: 503 W PORTLAND ST
PHOENIX AZ 85003 USA
Deed #: 040744231
Deed Date: 6/29/2004, 2-page warranty deed of Western Title Agency of Arizona, notarized 18 June 2004 by Lisa M. Bond. By that deed, he gave the parcel, which he'd owned as his separate property, to himself and his wife as community property. We don't why the transfer was done in June 2004 rather than at another time.
Legal Class: 6 6 3
Assessment Ratio: 5.0% 5.0% 10.0%
Property Use Code: 0131 0131 0131
Tax Area Code: 011300 011300 011300
real estate tax 2006 Open - CTX $1,652.08
Square Feet of Living Space: 2,984
Improvement Quality Grade: R-3
Lot Square Footage: 10,875
Covered Parking: 2 Car Garage
Unique Location Characteristics: None
Construction Year: 1916 (It's an old house.)
Pool Square Footage:
Number of Patios: 2
Bath Fixtures: 8
Patio Type: Covered
Cooling: Refrigeration
Exterior Walls: Brick
Heating: Yes
Roof Type: Asphalt Shingle
Physical Condition: Average
By the way, Goddard's Phoenix is the city referred to in Glen Campbell's song, "By the Time I Get to Phoenix".
By the time I get to Phoenix she'll be rising She'll find the note I left hangin' on her door She'll laugh when she reads the part that says I'm leavin' 'Cause I've left that girl so many times before
This is an approximate account of a few events one night in a jail in Arizona.
A prisoner asked to get medical treatment. He was brought to a nurse in the jail. He told the nurse that he had an itchy rash on his groin. The nurse asked, "Are there pustules?" He said that he did not know what pustule means. She asked if there were pus boils. He said no. She handed him a tube of ointment. The visit was over. He left, then submitted a grievance form comlaining that he had received incompetent medical treatment. The prisoner wanted to receive competent medcial treatment for the rash. The nurse should at least have looked at the rash. If the rash had been on the prisoner's elbow, the nurse would have looked at it. If she's too shy to look at a man's groin, she shouldn't be allowed to work in a jail. More or less, this was the grievance.
If the prisoner had been a free person going to a doctor in that part of Arizona for that rash, the doctor would at least have looked at it. Furthermore, the nurse did not schedule a follow-up visit. For example, the nurse did not say, "The ointment should cure you in three or four days. If you have the rash five days from now, come back."
To respond to the prisoner's grievance form, the prisoner was brought to the person supervising the entire jail at that time. The supervisor read the grievance form and allowed the prisoner to add any remarks he wanted. The supervisor then said that he (the supervisor) was incompetent to evaluate medical care provided by the nurse. Therefore, the prisoner lost the grievance. No other medical care was provided.
We think that the jail's management has a duty to provide reasonable medical care to prisoners. This requires having impartial evaluation of the care actually provided to the prisoners. If you hire someone to paint your house, that doesn't mean he did the job right. If you hire someone to provide medical care to your prisoners, that doesn't mean he did the job right. If a jail's management is unable to find out (either directly or through an independent contractor) whether the jail's medical staff provides reasonable medical care to prisoners, the jail should be closed. If a jail is closed, its prisoners should either be freed (an unlikely possibility) or transferred to a jail which provides reasonable medical care.
It is wrong to treat an itchy rash neither looking at it nor scheduling a follow-up visit. We mention this because terrible medical care is common in American jails. The attorney general of Arizona does not manage the jail in the account above.
The account above applies to Arizona. We are under the impression that, in California, a state agency tries to find out if local jails meet minimal, state, quality standards. We don't know if that agency tries to find out if prisoners get reasonable medical care.
As far as we know, there is a federal law that a prisoner may not sue his jail for a problem if the jail had a grievance system that met certain requirements, and the prisoner had not previously filed a grievance using that grievance system. We think that there's an exception for grievances which would have been futile to file. In other words, the prisoner may sue a jail with a grievance system even if the prisoner had not filed a grievance about the subject matter of the suit if he proves that the grievance would have been futile, as far as we know. This raises a question of which grievances are futile. The discussion below is based on a few kinds of information (for example: reading copies of grievances submited by prisoners, and friendly communciations with C.O.s and prisoners about the processing of prisoners' grievances).
In most (not all) jails, it is futile to file a grievance:
The grievance-deciding employee may have no formal education after high school. Furthermore, he guess-decides (whether the complained-of conduct is illegal) off the top of his head. Even a lawyer would insist on doing legal research before deciding the issue.
The following account is approximately accurate. A prisoner once submitted a grievance (either as a letter or as a greivance form) in a small, county jail. He was brought to the sheriff, in the sheriff's office. ("I'm internal affairs.") The prisoner explained the grievance, which claimed that the jail did something illegal to him. The grievance cited specific provisions of state law. The sheriff said, without checking those provisions or any other law, that he had been a federal marshal earlier in his career, that federal prisoners did not have that right, and that prisoners in his state had fewer rights than federal prisoners. The prisoner said that, in general, prisoners in his state had fewer rights than federal prisoners but that generalization was irrelevant. The prisoner explained to the sheriff that prisoners in that state had one right that federal prisoners supposedly lack, the right that the prisoner's grievance was based on. The sheriff admitted that the prisoner's logic was right (in the sense that it was wrong for the sheriff to conclude that state prisoners lacked that right merely because federal prisoners supposedly lacked that right). The sheriff said that he would look into the matter, then seems to have done nothing. The sheriff did not know the law. There was no lawyer present during the discussion and his ignorant remarks strongly suggested that he had not conferred with a lawyer about the grievance prior to the discussion. It seems extremely unlikely that anyone on the staff of that small, poor jail ever confers with a lawyer merely to respond to a prisoner's grievance.
A jail employee, when deciding a grievance, will never conclude that a widespread practice is illegal. The employee will conclude that the widespread practice must be legal because it is widespread. An employee might even irrelevantly say to a prisoner who had submitted a grievance, "Office Smith isn't the only one who does this. All the C.O.s do it that way." It is futile to point out that the illegality is even worse if done to many prisoner-victims or if done by many employees.
The non-medical staff will neither decide a medical grievance nor consult an impartial person to decide if the grievance is valid. The medical staff, when responding to a grievance, will never (as far as we know) talk to the prisoner who submitted it. Also, regardless of how clear the medical misconduct, the medical staff seems to loath admiting in writing that it misttreated a prisoner.
Among non-medical staff, it is common to talk to the prisoner as part of processing his grievance. He may have additional facts or analysis that he did not put on his grievance form. Also, if he loses, the non-medical staff may want to tell him face-to-face why he lost. When medical staff handle a grievance, the prisoner is not talked to (neither as part of handling the grievance, nor to tell him why he lost if he lost).
In general, medical grievances are processed much more slowly than other grievances.
A grievance is signed by the employee who decides it. Usually, high-ranking, non-medical employees do not want to be bothered processing grievances. Non-medical grievances usually are signed by a low-ranking employee (maybe a C.O. or his boss). Medical employees seem to regard a grievance as a potentially dangerous document, much too important to be signed by a low-ranking employee. Medical grievances usually are signed by a high-ranking, medical employee.
By the way, jail employees are routinely told which prisoner filed a grievance against them even whent the prisoner's identity is irrelevant. This routine practice helps felonious revenge.
Subject to the futility policies listed above, staff is most likely to grant a grievance:
Sometimes, C.O.s tell a prisoner that submiting grievances is futile (for example, more or less: "There is no such thing as prisoner rights." and "I can wipe my ass with grievances.") We do not know what effect such remarks have on a prisoner's legal duty to exhaust his administrative remedies (by submiting a grievance form) before suing the jail.
Joseph M. "Joe" Arpaio, born in Springfield, Massachusetts, is the politically powerful sheriff of Maricopa County, Arizona. He is a controversial, elected officer of a county government.
JOSEPH M ARPAIO born 1932-06-14 lived in Scottsdale AZ.
There is an article on "Ripoff Report" Web page about Joe Arpaio, submitted 7/4/2004, modified 7/19/2006, by Jim of Peoria, Arizona. The article seems to claim that there is lack of accounting for some finances. According to our understanding of the article, Arpaio has bought real estate together with Ava Arpaio (about whom we provide campaign contribution information. which we got from the Arizona Secretary of State's Web site, below). Sheriff Joseph Arpaio seems to have accumulated much wealth while on a government salary.
office address 100 W. Washinton, Ste. 1900 Phoenix, Arizona 85383
We don't know where he lives. Below are addresses of two of the parcels he seems to have bought. He does not necessarily own them now or live in them.
ARPAIO AVA J 6648 E Sharon Dr, Scottsdale, AZ 85254 08/09/2000 $256.00 Name: Address: Cash $256.00 HOMEMAKEROccupation: Arpaio, Ava 9999 E. 99th St., Scottsdale, AZ 99999 12/18/2007 $25.00 Name: Address: Cash $25.00 retired, N/AOccupation: holiday party [contribution for Christmas party?].Look at contributor Ava's address for 2007. As far as we know: in some jurisdictions, it may be illegal, even criminal, to provide false campaign finance information. We are not expert in Arizona campaign finance law. We don't know if Ava lives at either of the two addresses supplied for her above, addresses we got from the Arizona Secreatry of State's Web site.
Joseph is a government officer. It sometimes can be illegal for a government officer to personally profit from inside information. For example, if a government officer is entrusted by the government with confidential government information to enable him to do his government job, and if he then personally profits because he uses that that information for his personal benefit, he may possibly have done a crime and a tort in some jurisdictions. Remedies may sometimes include having him disgorge, to the government, all of the income and other benefit he received. Many people have heard about this (personal profit resulting from use of inside information) in conjunction with negotiable securities and the SEC but it can sometimes apply elsewhere also. Consider a hypothetical government officer who wants to buy real estate and therefore gets confidential government information (criminal records, driver records, motor vehicle registartion records, perhaps) about a potential seller to decide whether to buy from him. That would be an improper use of the information because it would be for his own benefit. An investigator could find the names of those who sold the subject (the government officer who's being investigated) real estate, then see if there had been inquiries of governmental databases (about those sellers) at about the time the subject bought (or agreed to buy) from the sellers. If the subject were a landlord who had leased real estate to his tenants, one similarly could find out if there had been inquiries of governmental databases (about those tenants) about the time that the subject leased to those tenants. You get the idea. Some people make much money in real estate because they know much about whom they do business with, and they know much because they improperly get information from the government. All resulting income and other benefit (for example, rental income and sales income) should be disgorged to the government. Furthermore, it sometimes may be appropriate to confiscate instrumentalities of crime such as computer systems and databases used to criminally obtain confidential information from the government.
By the way, consider a government officer who gets information for free that members of the public must buy. For example, the officer wants to buy real estate. Anyone can buy the driver record of a potential seller but the officer gets the record for free while he's on the job. The officer examines the information he got for free, concludes that it is wise to buy from that potential seller, then buys. Later, the officer sells. In our opinion, all of the sales income, or at least the sales profit, should be paid to the government.
Also by the way: sometimes, before a government officer buys real estate, he investigates the neighbors, while he's on the job, to see whom he'll be next to if he buys. He investigates the neighbors by getting government information which is confidential, free to him, or both. The more one knows about real estate opportunities, the more likley one is to profit.
Consider a hypothetical officer, involved in a real estate transaction for his own benefit, who improperly investigates, in the manner described above, the other party to the transaction. For example, an officer-buyer investigates a seller by implicitly pretendiung that he needs the information to do his government work. The sale occurs. The buyer now has the realty and the seller now has the money. We feel that what happened is unfair to, among others, the seller and others who wanted to buy, and that rescission should be available as a remedy. Maybe what happened in the hypothetical transaction just above is undue influence, which can justify rescission. The officer may have a special relationship with the seller, the relationship which enabled the officer to get the inforamtion about the seller. Furthermore maybe, the officer, because he pretended that getting the seller-related information was part of his job, should be estopped to deny that he had a special relationship with the seller. Undue influence cases sometimes involve doctors, nurses, and lawyers. We haven't studied this and we don't happen to know of any undue influence cases involving a government officer. Maybe the above transaction involves fraud which consists of concealment of a material fact; namely, the buyer's illegal investigation of the seller. This is a speculative, off-the-cuff paragraph, not the fruit of extensive research.
If you'ree interested in this, talk with a lawyer about consequences of using inside information in real estate transactions. We guess that state law usually is more important than federal law in that context.
We do not know if Arpaio engaged in the activities described above. In our opinion, it would be appropriate to legally investigate Arpaio, his subordinates, and other government officers in Maricopa County (for example, regarding use of confidential county and state databases to investigate real estate opportunities).
Most officers below are medical, dental, and pharmaceutical. The physicians ("PHYSCN") make little money for physicians. Why don't they work where physicians are paid more? In any event, we got the infomation below from Arizona Government Officres' Name, Job Title, Agency, Pay in November 2009.
- ADU-TUTU, MICHAEL DENTAL PROG MGR Corrections, Dept of $151,049 2009nov22
MICHAEL ADU-TUTU 7338 CARIBBEAN LN PEORIA, AZ 85381
MICHAEL ADU-TUTU 9235 74TH DR PEORIA, AZ 85345
MICHAEL ADU-TUTU 303 BASELINE RD PHOENIX, AZ 85040 (602) 268-1655
- AHEE, FERRIS DENTIST Corrections, Dept of $114,999
- ALATHMAN, RABIHA PHARMACIST POOL Corrections, Dept of $128,544 2009nov22
FERRIS D AHEE Born Jun 1958, 4460 HAVEN LN TUCSON, Pima Ciunty, AZ 85712 (520) 327-4499
FERRIS D AHEE Born Nov 1931, 8180 RIVENOAK DR TUCSON, AZ 85715 (520) 296-3371
- ALLEN, JACK A. PHARMACIST POOL Corrections, Dept of $128,544
- AUSTIN, CYRUS F. DENTIST SPV Corrections, Dept of $127,874
- BAIK, JAMES S. DENTIST Corrections, Dept of $109,850
- BARCKLAY, KAREN B. PHYSCN SPV Corrections, Dept of $149,350
- BARTOS, IVAN C. DC REGNL OPS ADMR Corrections, Dept of $99,328
- BELCOURT, CRAIG L. PHYSCN Corrections, Dept of $149,350
- BELZER, ANN A. DC CORRL CLNCL PHARMACIST Corrections, Dept of $96,460
- BOOTHBY, LESLIE P. PHARMACY PROG MGR Corrections, Dept of $102,639
- BRESLOW, MICHAEL F. PHYSCN 3 Corrections, Dept of $181,949
- BUCKNER, LISA J. CHARGE PHARMACIST Corrections, Dept of $96,460
- BURKE, AUDREY A. DC DPTY DIV DIR Corrections, Dept of $99,328
- CLEARY, MICHAEL F. PSYCHIATRIST Corrections, Dept of $169,301
- COONS, JESSE R. PHYSCN SPV Corrections, Dept of $151,925
- CRANE JR, WILLIAM A. PHYSCN POOL Corrections, Dept of $214,240
- CREWS, TRACY L. PSY SPV Corrections, Dept of $180,250
- CURRY, JOANNE M. DENTIST POOL Corrections, Dept of $182,104
- DAVIS, JANECE M. DENTIST SPV Corrections, Dept of $120,150
- DELOS SANTOS, JOSE DENTIST Corrections, Dept of $106,760
- DIMAANO, ANTONIO R. PHYSCN 3 Corrections, Dept of $123,869
- ENCISO, VICENTE O. PHYSCN Corrections, Dept of $149,350
- FIGUEROA, REYNALDO A. PHYSCN Corrections, Dept of $141,625
- FLANAGAN, CHARLES F. DC DPTY DIV DIR Corrections, Dept of $100,000
- FREDRICKSON, JACK C. DENTIST Corrections, Dept of $109,850
- GOLDSMITH, CHARLES D. DC DIV DIR Corrections, Dept of $111,000
- GOMEZ, EDWARD DENTIST Corrections, Dept of $109,850
- GRANT, GARY B. DENTIST SPV Corrections, Dept of $123,240
- HALLAHAN, JOHN R. DC DIV DIR Corrections, Dept of $111,000
- HANSTAD, BRIAN T. DENTIST SPV Corrections, Dept of $115,000
- HARRISON, JESSICA A. PSYCHIATRIST Corrections, Dept of $166,499
- HERRERA, MICHAEL A. PHYSCN POOL Corrections, Dept of $214,240
- JARROLD, GARY G. CHARGE PHARMACIST Corrections, Dept of $96,460
- JENDUSA, DAVID J. PSYCHIATRIST Corrections, Dept of $169,301
- JOLLEY, THEODORE B. DC REGNL FACILITY HLTH ADMR Corrections, Dept of $97,335
- JOSEPH, GREGORY M. DENTIST Corrections, Dept of $112,939
- KANTER, BRUCE E. PHYSCN Corrections, Dept of $149,350
- KREBS, KARL T. DENTIST Corrections, Dept of $110,879
- KULP, ALAN K. DENTIST Corrections, Dept of $113,650
- LAWRENCE, BRADNER J. DENTIST POOL Corrections, Dept of $182,104
- LESAC, MICHAEL C. PHYSCN Corrections, Dept of $149,350
- LEWIS, KEVIN S. PHYSCN Corrections, Dept of $149,350
- LIPPERT, JOHANNA C. DC NURSE PRACTITIONER Corrections, Dept of $99,240
- LLOYD-HILLS, ALLANA S. CHARGE PHARMACIST Corrections, Dept of $96,460
- LOCKHART, JOHN E. PHYSCN Corrections, Dept of $149,350
- LONGFELLOW, THOMAS R. PHYSCN Corrections, Dept of $149,050
- LUCAS, PHILIP E. DENTIST Corrections, Dept of $109,850
- LUDENS, DOUGLAS R. DENTIST Corrections, Dept of $112,939
- MACABUHAY, RONOLFO S. PHYSCN SPV Corrections, Dept of $154,500
- MARKLEY, DONA M. DC DPTY DIR Corrections, Dept of $123,000
- MILAZZO, MICHAEL J. PHYSCN 3 Corrections, Dept of $134,083
- MONTGOMERY, JAMES G. PHARMACIST POOL Corrections, Dept of $128,544
- PALMER, DALE L. PHYSCN SPV Corrections, Dept of $154,500
- PATEL DDS, MEETA M. DENTIST Corrections, Dept of $105,729
- PAULLEY, IRMA I. DENTIST SPV Corrections, Dept of $123,240
- PETERSEN, THOMAS D. CHARGE PHARMACIST Corrections, Dept of $96,460
- PHAN, GIANG T. PHYSCN POOL Corrections, Dept of $214,240
- POLANCO, PRIDO PHYSCN SPV Corrections, Dept of $149,350
- READ, STANLEY PHARMACIST POOL Corrections, Dept of $128,544
- RECUBER, MICHAEL DENTIST POOL Corrections, Dept of $182,104
- RICARD DDS, RAPHAEL P. DENTIST Corrections, Dept of $105,730
- RICE, KENNETH F. DENTIST Corrections, Dept of $109,850
- RIHANEK, CAROLYN J. DENTIST Corrections, Dept of $114,999
- ROGERS, SUSAN L. DC GENERAL COUNSEL Corrections, Dept of $100,000
- ROMBERGER, ALEX E. DENTIST Corrections, Dept of $109,850
- ROWE, RICHARD H. PHYSCN SPV Corrections, Dept of $151,925
- RYAN JR, CHARLES L. DC DIV DIR Corrections, Dept of $125,000
- SALWITZ, MICHAEL T. PHYSCN SPV Corrections, Dept of $151,925
- SARDER, OMAR F. DENTIST Corrections, Dept of $110,879
- SCHREINER, TRACY A. AD HLTH SVCS DIV Corrections, Dept of $135,000
- SHARP, JEFFREY A. PHYSCN 3 Corrections, Dept of $134,234
- SHIPMAN, GREGORY L. DENTIST SPV Corrections, Dept of $121,179
- SONBERG-DAVENPORT, BILLI DC REGNL OPS ADMR Corrections, Dept of $99,000
- STEIN DMD, CHRISTIAN E. DENTIST SPV Corrections, Dept of $120,150
- STEINHAUSER, GALE PHYSCN Corrections, Dept of $151,925
- TAYLOR, DIANNE C. PHARMACIST POOL Corrections, Dept of $128,544
- TAYLOR, WANDA A. PSY SPV Corrections, Dept of $180,250
- TEE, CONCHITA A. PHYSCN Corrections, Dept of $146,775
- VINLUAN, EDUARDO L. PHYSCN Corrections, Dept of $146,775
- WAND, MARILYN M. CHARGE PHARMACIST Corrections, Dept of $96,460
- WEEKLY, CARLOS L. DENTIST SPV Corrections, Dept of $123,240
- WHITE, ROBERT A. PHYSCN SPV Corrections, Dept of $154,500
- WHITNEY, HAROLD E. PHYSCN Corrections, Dept of $149,350
- WILLIAMS, DEBORAH A. DENTIST SPV Corrections, Dept of $120,150
- WOHLER, JOHN PHYSCN Corrections, Dept of $151,925
- WOOLSEY, WADE Q. DC CONTRACT BEDS OPS ADMR Corrections, Dept of $99,000
- WRIGHT, JOAN L. CHARGE PHARMACIST Corrections, Dept of $96,460
- ZISCHKE, CREE DC DIV DIR Corrections, Dept of $130,000
21 January 2004,
ACPOA (Arizona Correctional Peace Officers Association) president is Sgt. JOSEPH M. "JOE" MASELLA, age 37, 10358 E CALYPSO AVE, MESA AZ 85208
14 August 2004, Department of Corrections Director: Dora B. Schriro, photo: DORA SCHRIRO, PHOENIX AZ 85012 or 85018, phone (602)
Paul Eckstein: court officer (attorney at law), Q1/2007, Christopher Dodd, 2,300. 22 W HAYWARD AVE, Phoexnix AZ
The Arizona prosecutor known as Deputy Pima County Attorney Philip R. Perkins (Arizona state bar number 010089) may possibly be:
Philip R. Perkins
7450 North San Anna Drive
Tuscon, AZ 85704
(520) 297-2894
Clarence W. Dupnik, Sheriff of Pima County of Arizona, may posibly be:
67 years old
4311 East Homes Street
Tuscon AZ 85711
photo
Barbara E. LaWall, 55 years old, county attorney of Pima county of Arizona, may possibly live at:
32 North Stone Avenue
Tuscon AZ 85701
(520) 299-4317
two police officers Sgt. Tim Fletcher and Officer Rikki Klotzbach
Officer Klotzbach posibly may live at:
2980 Cisco Drive South
Lake Havasu City, AZ 86403
Phone: 928-855-2553
Officer Fletcher may posibly be:
Tim Fletcher
24415 N 38th Terrace
Glendale, AZ 85310
Phone: 623-587-8614
Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas
Andrew P Thomas Maricopa County Attorney 301 W Jefferson Phoenix, AZ 85003-2191
ANDREW P THOMAS, Born 1966, 4408 NISBET RD PHOENIX, AZ 85032 (602) 485-1489
11 March 2004
Eric O'dell, ERIC J ODELL, about age 31, 7300 N MONA LISA RD, TUCSON AZ 85741
George Traviola, GEORGE P TRAVIOLA, 2740 W MARMORA PL, TUCSON AZ 85713
Richard Saunders, age 30, 5467 E PLACITA DEL MESQUITE, TUCSON AZ 85712, (520) 327-2410
WEIERS 2009mar17
Rep. Jerry Weiers, Republican, District 12, Arizona House of Representatives
He and his brother, Speaker Jim Weiers, simultaneously have been in the Arizona House of Representatives.
Below is FAA information, available to the entire world from the FAA World Wide Web site, about his aircraft and his airman certificate.
Aircraft N2523G is Assigned Aircraft Description Serial Number 51823 Type Registration Individual Manufacturer Name CESSNA Certificate Issue Date 06/11/2002 Model 182B Status Valid Type Aircraft Fixed Wing Single-Engine (in our opinion, dangerous) Type Engine Reciprocating Pending Number Change None Dealer No Date Change Authorized None Mode S Code 50460664 MFR Year 1959 Fractional Owner NO Registered Owner Name WEIERS JERRY P Street 5025 N 81ST DR City GLENDALE State ARIZONA Zip Code 85303-6010 County MARICOPA Country UNITED STATES Airworthiness Engine Manufacturer CONT MOTOR Classification Standard Engine Model O-470 SERIES Category A/W Date 02/13/1959 ... Weiers's aircraft is above. His airman certificate is below. ... A394148600JERRY PAUL WEIERS 5025 N 81ST DR GLENDALE AZ85303-6010USA WP3052008052010 A394148601PP P/ASEL (We guess that, in "P/ASEL", "P" means pilot of, and "SEL" means single engine license. Maybe "A" means fixed wing aircraft.)
JERRY P WEIERS Born 1957, 5025 81ST DR GLENDALE, AZ 85303
This paladium.net Web site and all of its contents are provided as is, solely for informational purposes, and without warranty. There is no express warranty, no implied warranty, and no warranty of fitness for an intended purpose. We are not liable for informational errors or incompleteness. We have no duty to update anything. Verify all statements and claims. Carefully read and consider many sources of information, analysis, and opinion. Please inform us of each and every falsehood in this Web site. We own all email messsages and other communications to us. This Web site contains parody and humor. Our linking to a Web site is not approval or endorsement. This Web site, which is not exclusively about government officers, identifies some people who never were government officers. Our discussions and editorials do not necessarily apply to anyone named or identified in this Web site.
Home Addresses of People Most of Whom Are Current or Former Government Officers
| |||
|---|---|---|---|
| publicity about this site | search this site | an idea | research tips |
| world's governments main page | previous page | next page | |
