My research
Watermark is assembled by the record team, working entirely from public records — documents the developer didn't write. This is that research: the method it's held to, what it's still missing, and how to correct it.
The method is the bio: every figure on this site is read from a primary source, validated against a typed schema, tagged for confidence, and linked back so you never have to take our word for it. If something here is wrong, that's a record to correct, not a verdict to defend.
How the record is built and labeled — the evidence tags, the schema, and the chain of custody — is written up in full in the methodology.
What the record is still missing
The research is honest about its gaps. Every dataset behind this site — its
source, license, freshness, and what it doesn't yet cover — is tracked in the
data catalog, the standing successor to
the hand-maintained corpus-completeness audit. What's withheld or unresolved is
marked [open], never dressed as fact.
- Independent. No affiliation with the developer, the county, or any party to the project — this is public-records research, not advocacy.
- Reachable. Found an error, or have a document the record is missing? Submit a tip or correction →
- Accountable to the source. The standard is the same one we hold the record to: cite it, or don't claim it. Read the methodology.