ALPR DETECTIONS/HITS/SHARING

To Whom It May Concern:

Pursuant to the California Public 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:

5) The aggregate number of “detections” (i.e. license plate scans and associated data) collected during 2016;
6) The aggregate number of detections collected during 2017;
7) The aggregate number of detections collected during 2018;
8) The aggregate number of “hits” (i.e. times that a plate on a hotlist was detected) during 2016;
9) The aggregate number of “hits” during 2017;
10) The aggregate number of “hits” during 2018.

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.

For a list of other agencies that have provided records of these nature, please visit: https://www.eff.org/pages/explore-alpr

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 10 calendar days, as the statute requires.

Sincerely,

Michelle Laquindanum

Dear Ms. Santiago,

Thank you for your email. However, I urge you to please reconsider your response to my public records requests.

In your letter, you cite a 2015 Los Angeles County Superior Court opinion that says that automated license plate reader information is exempt from disclosure because it constitutes law enforcement records of investigation. This legal opinion is outdated. In 2017, the California Supreme Court overturned that ruling in ACLU vs. The Superior Court of Los Angeles County. The California Supreme Court wrote in its ruling, “Accordingly, we hold that real parties’ process of ALPR scanning does not produce records of investigations, because the scans are not conducted as part of a targeted inquiry into any particular crime or crimes.”

Link: https://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/archive/S227106.PDF

Please reevaluate your response based on this court decision.

Further, you assert that ALPR data collected by Newport Beach Police Department is managed and maintained by Vigilant Solutions, a private company and that I should direct my request to them. However, according to Vigilant Solutions’ Automated License Plate Reader policy, “The company is the custodian and owner of the ALPR system and is responsible for implementing this policy, except for law enforcement owned LPR camera systems and the resulting data, for which the respective law enforcement agency is the owner of the LPR data and the company is the custodian.”

Link: https://www.vigilantsolutions.com/lpr-usage-and-privacy-policy/

While Vigilant may be the custodian of the data, the data itself belongs to Newport Beach and must be provided. You can review Newport Beach’s contract with Vigilant Solutions to confirm.

I also refer you to Newport Beach Police Department’s Automated License Plate Reader policy: http://www.nbpd.org/civica/filebank/blobdload.asp?BlobID=2757

To be clear, I am not seeking the actual data collected by automated license plate readers, but aggregate information about how the data is shared, how much data is collected each year, and how many “hits” the data produces each year. This data has been provided by dozens of other agencies across California without problem.

The Data Sharing Report is the simplest way to produce the information on the agencies receiving and supplying ALPR data, however, if you prefer to provide the raw data instead, I would accept that. This information is not data collected by ALPR but instead illustrates the relationship between agencies.

Hi,

Thanks so much for your help with this request! I really appreciate it.

Sincerely,
Michelle Laquindanum