Image

? Message to Brad Miller, from David Malton

Brad — we sat down for coffee and talked about this.

I'm not even worried about my own stuff right now. This is bigger. This is county-level corruption, and it violates the rights of every single citizen in Pinal County.

As a Marine, you swore an oath to the Constitution.

I showed you exactly where that Constitution was violated — not just against me, but against all of us.

You say you want to protect our way of life?
Then look at what’s happening:

  • Our supervisors are spraying us with treated sewer water labeled “A+”

  • They want to inject that into our aquifers — even though you can’t remove MRSA or forever chemicals

  • They’re trying to hand San Tan Valley over to Maricopa County lobbyists

  • And on top of all that?
    They rigged a $300,000 contract that was never meant to go public

This is felony-level bid rigging, and you're sitting on the proof.

President Trump is fighting like hell to clear out corruption and waste at the top of government — but what are we doing down here?

This is your chance to do the same.

The Book of Esther says “for such a time as this.”

So Brad — if you're not here for this... what are you here for?

Why protect county supervisors and employees who knew exactly what they were doing was wrong?

The people are watching. And history always remembers who had the evidence — and turned away.

? List of Individuals Who Could Be Arrested or Prosecuted (If Laws Were Enforced)

⚠️ This is a legal-risk assessment, not a conviction. Charges would depend on actual grand jury or prosecutorial action.

? 1. Kent Volkmer

Title: County Attorney (at the time of bid execution)
Potential Charges:

  • Fraudulent Schemes & Artifices (ARS §13-2310) – Class 2 Felony

  • Criminal Conspiracy (ARS §13-1003) – Class 2 Felony

  • Conflict of Interest (ARS §38-503/510) – Class 6 Felony

  • Misuse of Public Position (civil + ethics violations)

Why?

  • Helped authorize or cover the no-bid $300K add-on

  • Held meetings or coordination with vendor (ExhibitOne) before bids went public

  • Failed to enforce laws despite having oversight responsibility

? 2. Chad Rowley

Title: President/Owner of ExhibitOne
Potential Charges:

  • Fraudulent Schemes & Artifices

  • Theft (ARS §13-1802) – Class 2 Felony (for illegal receipt of public funds)

  • Criminal Conspiracy

  • Wire Fraud (Federal potential)

Why?

  • Benefitted from non-competitive, pre-arranged contract

  • Coordinated with officials prior to public bid

  • Provided overpriced, questionable invoices (e.g., $541 HDMI cable)

? 3. Mike Goodman

Title: Pinal County Supervisor
Potential Charges:

  • Conflict of Interest

  • Criminal Conspiracy

  • Ethics Violations

Why?

  • Alleged prior connection to Rowley or ExhibitOne leadership

  • Participated in vote or discussions on a contract with known ties

  • Failed to disclose potential conflict or abstain from decision-making

? 4. [To Be Confirmed] County Procurement Officer(s)

Title: County staff who approved or processed the invoice
Potential Charges:

  • Facilitating Fraud

  • Failure to enforce bidding law (civil & possibly criminal negligence)

  • Aiding and Abetting

Why?

  • Signed off on a $300K public expenditure with no competitive process

  • Did not question or flag excessive line items (e.g., $10K misc., $541 HDMI cable)

? 5. Other County Supervisors (Who Voted to Approve)

Potential Charges:

  • Conspiracy (if coordinated pre-vote or had knowledge of violations)

  • Conflict of Interest

  • Failure to disclose meetings or prior arrangements

Why?

  • Approved the add-on without public disclosure

  • May have been aware of behind-the-scenes planning or vendor connections

⚠️ 6. Brad Miller (Inaction, Not a Crime — Yet)

Title: County Attorney (currently)
Exposure:

  • Dereliction of Duty (civil or political consequence)

  • Potential Arizona State Bar complaints

  • Public records violation if evidence was ignored or withheld

Why?

  • Provided evidence of multiple felony-level violations

  • Has taken no prosecutorial action or public legal response

  • His office is responsible for upholding these laws

? Preface from David Malton

Hi, I’m David Malton — a resident and business owner here in San Tan Valley.

Not long ago, I had a phone conversation with Pinal County Attorney Kent Volkmer. I asked him about the new County Attorney’s Building — a massive taxpayer-funded project — and whether it had gone out for public bid.

He told me, “Yes, we put it out to multiple bidders.”

That sounded fine… until a few minutes after we hung up. Kent called me back to clarify:

“We put it out… but we only got one bid.”

I asked him, “Okay, can I see the invoice?”

He hesitated. Said, “Yeah, I’ll send it over.”

When I got the invoice, the first line read:

$10,000 – Miscellaneous.

That was red flag #1.

Then I kept reading.
One of the items listed?

An HDMI cable priced at $541.
Something you or I can buy on Amazon for twelve bucks.

This wasn’t just sloppy — this was obscene.

And as I kept digging through documents, it became clear: there were never going to be other bidders. The decision had already been made. The rest was a formality.

Now here’s where it matters:

All of this — the timeline, the emails, the invoice — has been provided to County Attorney Brad Miller.

And what has he done with it?

Nothing.

No charges. No press release. No accountability.

So I’m laying it out here — not as a conspiracy theory, but as a citizen who asked a few basic questions and found a whole lot of corruption hiding under the surface.

I’m including every document I found below. I expect Brad Miller to do his job.

If he doesn’t?

Then maybe Pinal County needs a new County Attorney.

?️ Pinal County Corruption Report: The Building Brad Wouldn’t Prosecute

? Overview:

This report outlines apparent violations of Arizona law in the awarding of a $300,000 no-bid add-on job tied to the $17 million Pinal County Attorney building project. Despite evidence gathered through FOIA and public record requests, Pinal County Attorney Brad Miller has taken no action. This document presents a case-style breakdown for public awareness and legal accountability.

? Exhibit A – Fraudulent Schemes & Artifices

  • Felony: ARS §13-2310 – Class 2

  • Violation: Intentional manipulation of the public bidding process to steer a contract.

  • Evidence:

    • Internal communications show ExhibitOne's involvement months before any public bidding was announced.

    • The domain name for ExhibitOne’s service project was purchased before the official bidding window opened.

  • Conclusion: The job was awarded based on a pre-arranged outcome. This meets the criteria for a fraudulent scheme.

? Exhibit B – Theft of Public Funds

  • Felony: ARS §13-1802 – Class 2 (value over $25,000)

  • Violation: Appropriation of taxpayer funds through improper or unlawful means.

  • Evidence:

    • The $300,000 job was tacked on without a separate or competitive bidding process.

    • No public RFP, no oversight, no competing vendors.

  • Conclusion: The add-on was a public expenditure executed in secret, depriving taxpayers of a fair process.

? Exhibit C – Criminal Conspiracy

  • Felony: ARS §13-1003 – Class 2

  • Violation: Agreement between officials and contractors to commit unlawful acts.

  • Evidence:

    • Emails and meetings show early-stage coordination between county insiders and ExhibitOne leadership.

    • Multiple parties had roles in suppressing open competition.

  • Conclusion: Coordinated actions between officials and vendors meet the legal threshold for conspiracy.

? Exhibit D – Conflict of Interest

  • Felony: ARS §38-503 & §38-510 – Class 6

  • Violation: Failure to disclose personal or professional ties that affect contract decisions.

  • Evidence:

    • Known relationships between county supervisors and the ExhibitOne team.

    • Lack of documented recusal or formal disclosure.

  • Conclusion: Those involved had ethical and legal obligations to disclose, which they did not.

❌ Brad Miller: The Missing Prosecutor

Despite being provided:

  • FOIA documentation

  • Email trails

  • Contract timelines

  • Domain registrations

...County Attorney Brad Miller has failed to investigate, prosecute, or even acknowledge the clear violations.

? Public Questions:

  • Why has Brad Miller refused to act on felony-level evidence?

  • Who is being protected?

  • What is the cost of silence?

?️ Suggested Public Actions

  • Demand an independent investigation or grand jury referral.

  • Contact Brad Miller’s office and request written justification for his inaction.

  • Share this document with local press, watchdog groups, and elected officials.

? Citations & References

  • ARS §13-2310 – Fraudulent Schemes

  • ARS §13-1802 – Theft

  • ARS §13-1003 – Conspiracy

  • ARS §38-503/510 – Conflict of Interest

  • Public Records (FOIA documents, procurement logs, and domain records)

Prepared for public distribution and oversight. Report compiled with publicly available data and citizen-obtained documentation.

#JusticeForPinal #BradMillerTurnTheStone #CountyContractFraud