I’m saying that she makes statements which aren’t backed up by anything when people ask for substantiation. If she wanted a ruling - rather than simple counsel - I believe that would have to be in writing. I could check that.
I also asked for all communications to and from their office regarding whether or not they could print a 1961 birth index, as well as documentation showing their policy of only collecting index data in 5-year increments (how the heck do you only collect by 5-year increments when you’ve got a continuously-running system with data entered by computer?) I would bet you $100 that I never see anything. They’ll say they don’t have it. They don’t have anything in that office - even what is required by law. Things they should do in written form they do without written form so they never have to document anything.
My point, though, is that she spouts from the mouth without offering any substantiation.
Something else I wanted to add is that I have given far, far more documentation than Okubo has ever given - but say that you can’t trust me.
Yet you trust not only her, but what she said.
Seems like a double standard to me. I lay my evidence before everyone so they can decide one way or another. If you think it’s not enough that’s fine; at least you have it in front of you to evaluate.
Janice Okubo has never - not once - offered you (or anybody else) the same courtesy even though it is required by law and she’s paid to do it. Why do you think that is?