Vehicle Assignment, 78th pct, May 30th 2020

To Whom It May Concern:

Pursuant to the New York Freedom of Information Law, I hereby request the following records:

- "PD 120-141 Daily Vehicle Assignment Sheet" or records sufficient to show vehicle assignment of the NYPD 78th precinct for May 30th, 2020.

Records of vehicle assignment is requested for only publicly marked RMP vehicles, and not unmarked vehicles. This request is not for any sensitive location or time. Records may be redacted to only show marked RMP vehicle numbers and officer assignment.

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 5 business days, as the statute requires.

Sincerely,

Ryan Watkins

To Whom It May Concern:

I hereby appeal the March 3, 2021 denial of access regarding my request, FOIL request id 'FOIL-2021-056-03199'.

The records that were denied are:

- "PD 120-141 Daily Vehicle Assignment Sheet" or records sufficient to show vehicle assignment of the NYPD 78th precinct for May 30th, 2020.

The request was denied "on the basis of Public Officers Law Section 87(2)(e)(iv) as such information, if disclosed, would reveal non-routine techniques and procedures."

In appealing:

This request is for only vehicle number and officer assignment, for a single precinct, for a single day more than 9 months ago.

The records sufficient to respond to this request would not provide information on the daily routine patrol areas or areas of increased or reduced patrols, nor would it reveal sensitive locations or times or locations of confidential investigations, as the request is for only vehicle number and assigned officer, not location or time. These records would provide no knowledge that violators could use to evade detection by tailoring their conduct.

Furthermore:

(a) The denial does not provide the justification for the exemption. The denial only quotes the statute but does not provide particularized and specific justification for denying access, clarifying why the records are exempt. New York courts have consistently held that FOIL is broadly construed, exemptions are narrow, and that agencies have the burden to provide a "particularized and specific justification" about why records are exempt.

(b) I request that segregabilty analysis be done and provide justification for exempted records and respond with all non-exempt records. Even if some of the records are justified as exempt, such as vehicles used in confidential investigations, I request non-exempt records be provided.

(c) The exemption claimed does not apply to this request as vehicle assignments are not techniques or procedures. The request is for a list of only vehicle number and officer, not any investigative technique or procedure the public would not normally be aware of.

(d) Even if the records would reveal a technique or procedure, they are routine. It is clear to the public that vehicles are assigned to officers. Providing vehicle assignments for May 30th, 2020 provides no knowledge on how to evade the technique or procedure at a later date.

(e) The request is narrow, only for records for vehicles, for a single day, for a single precinct. A record of only marked RMP vehicles listing vehicle number and officer name is sufficient to satisfy this records request.

As required by the Freedom of Information Law, a response is required within 10 business days of the receipt of an appeal. If the records are denied on appeal, please explain the reasons for the denial fully in writing as required by law.

Sincerely,

Ryan Watkins

RE: FOIL-2021-056-03199

To Records Access Appeals Officer, Sergeant Jordan S. Mazur, Esq.,

Regarding the my denial of appeal of FOIL-2021-056-03199 on the basis that these records were already requested on January 18, 2021, denied by the RAO on January 21, 2021, and subsequently appealed and denied on February 17, 2021.

Respectfully, the previous FOIL request 2021-056-00793 appeal denied on February 17, 2021 addressed the denial of Roll Call and personnel/deployment records and not the Vehicle Assignment records requested. The subsequent request FOIL-2021-056-03199 on March 3, 2021 requested only vehicle number and officer, not roll call, deployment or any details on location or time, specifically to address concerns raised in the previous denial of appeal.

The denial of appeal of February 17, 2021 cited:
"disclosure of Precinct roll call records and other personnel/deployment records would reveal non-routine criminal investigation techniques or procedures; specifically, manpower, deployment of resources, sensitive locations and times of confidential investigations".

as well as:
"disclosure of a Precinct Roll Call could endanger the life or safety of both individual officers and community members in that the public disclosure of that information would provide not only the specific daily routine patrol areas of individual officers at specific times of day, but also areas of the Precinct that are (and, consequently, are not) deemed to be sensitive locations subject to special attention, directed patrols and increased presence."

Justification was provided for exemption of Precinct Roll Call and Detail Roster. Justification was not provided for denial the Vehicle Assignment records sufficient to show vehicle number and officer assignment.

The appeal on February 17, 2021 requested that non-exempt records be provided. As justification for exemption was provided for only a portion of the records requested, a new request was filed specific to the records not addressed in the February 17, 2021 denial of appeal.

I request review of the "PD 120-141 Daily Vehicle Assignment Sheet" for the 78th Precinct on May 30, 2020. If any portions of those records are exempt, I request redaction of those portions, and respond with the non-exempt portions of those records sufficient to show vehicle number and officer assignment.

Ryan Watkins