2018 Vigilant Data Sharing Information (Clayton County Sheriffs Office)

To Whom It May Concern:

Pursuant to the Georgia Open Records Act, I hereby request the following records:

1) The names of agencies and organizations with which the Agency shares ALPR data;
2) The names of agencies and organizations from which the Agency receives ALPR data;
3) The names of agencies and organizations with which the Agency shares “hot list” information;
4) The names of agencies and organizations from which the Agency receives “hot list” information;

This information is easily available within the Agency’s LEARN system. The simplest way to extract this data is to generate an “Agency Data Sharing Report” PDF file from within LEARN. To do this, a user may simply go to the “Sharing” section of LEARN and select “Output Report.” A CSV/XLS file containing these records would also satisfy this request.

The instructions for extracting this data is described on pages 62-63 of the LEARN Agency Manager Guide, which may be found at this link:

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3860685-LEARN-5-1-Agency-Manager-Guide.html

An example of this record may be found at this link:

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3936113-Palos-Verdes-Estates-Police-Department-Data.html

A number of other agencies have regularly determined the above information constitutes a public record and have provided an “Agency Data Sharing Report.” These agencies include:

Anaheim Police Department, Antioch Police Department, Bakersfield Police Department Chino Police Department, Clovis Police Department, Elk Grove Police Department, Fontana Police Department, Fountain Valley Police Department, Glendora Police Department, Hawthorne Police Department, Irvine Police Department, Livermore Police Department, Lodi Police Department, Long Beach Police Department, Montebello Police Department, Orange Police Department, Palos Verdes Estates Police Department, Red Bluff Police Department ,Sacramento Police Department, San Bernardino Police Department, San Diego Police Department, San Rafael Police Department, San Ramon Police Department, Simi Valley Police Department, and the Tulare Police Department.

We further request the following records

The aggregate number of “detections” (i.e. license plate scans and associated data) collected during 2016.
The aggregate number of detections collected during 2017.
The aggregate number of “hits” (i.e. times that a plate on a hotlist was detected) during 2016.
The aggregate number of “hits” during 2017.

This information is easily available within the Agency’s LEARN system. The simplest way to extract this data is to generate a “Dashboard Hit Ratio Report” PDF file from within LEARN. We would prefer the data for each year to be provided separately.

An example of this document may be found at: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3870802-Sacramento-PD-Hit-Ratio-Rpt-010112-051917-Redacted.html

The instructions for extracting this data is described on pages 78-79 of the LEARN Agency Manager Guide, which may be found at this link:
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3860685-LEARN-5-1-Agency-Manager-Guide.html

The following agencies have regularly determined the above information constitutes a public record and have provided an “Dashboard Hit Ratio Report.” These agencies include:

Anaheim Police Department; Bakersfield Police Department; Chino Police Department; Clovis Police Department; Elk Grove Police Department; Fontana Police Department; Irvine Police Department; La Habra Police Department; Laguna Beach Police Department; Lodi Police Department; Sacramento Police Department; San Diego Police Department; San Ramon Police Department; and the Red Bluff Police Department.

The requested documents will be made available to the general public, and this request is not being made for commercial purposes.

In the event that there are fees, I would be grateful if you would inform me of the total charges in advance of fulfilling my request. I would prefer the request filled electronically, by e-mail attachment if available or CD-ROM if not.

Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation in this matter. I look forward to receiving your response to this request within 3 business days, as the statute requires.

Sincerely,

Dave Maass