Persistent Surveillance Systems Invoices (Reno Police Department)

To Whom It May Concern:

Pursuant to the Nevada Public Records Act, I hereby request the following records:

All records responsive to the below requests dated from January 1, 2014 through July 28, 2016.
- The full documentation of all contracts or non-disclosure agreements (enacted OR IN EFFECT between the above dates) with the companies "Persistent Surveillance Systems" or "Vigilant Solutions"
- Copies of all invoices to or from these companies, and documents sufficient to show any and all disbursement of public funds to either company
- The full documentation of all contracts (enacted OR IN EFFECT between the above dates) with any company other than the two cited above, in which said company provides your department with equipment or services (including software) for 1. license plate scanning or reading or automatic photographing; 2. aerial surveillance, excluding monitoring roadways for speed infractions.
- Copies of all invoices to or from any company that fits the description in the prior paragraph, and documents sufficient to show any disbursement of public funds to any company that fits this description
- All emails between police department email accounts and users on the domains "pss-1.com" or "vigilantsolutions.com". (One example would be brian.schockley@vigilantsolutions.com. Users on the domain would be in the form of XXXXXXXXX@vigilantsolutions.com)
- All paper-based communications between your department and Persistent Surveillance Systems, and between your department and Vigilant Solutions. In asking for all paper and electronic correspondence, this request necessarily includes marketing materials and descriptions of product capabilities for any device, software, or access/capability this department has purchased. A circuit court judge in Illinois recently ruled that non-disclosure agreements signed by public bodies do not trump freedom of information laws when it comes to surveillance equipment/capability purchased by police. Citation:
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/01/chicago-police-must-finally-produce-stingray-records-judge-orders/
- Documents sufficient to show all rules or regulations governing the use of products (hardware or software) that do 1. license plate scanning or reading or automatic photographing; 2. aerial surveillance, excluding monitoring roadways for speed infractions.
- The text of all agreements (whether formal, email, memo, or otherwise) between your department and any other public body or department that allows your department to use or access the capabilities of 1. license plate scanning or reading or automatic photographing; 2. aerial surveillance, excluding monitoring roadways for speed infractions.
- Documents sufficient to show the month and year your department first entered a program of scanning license plates or accessing a database of scanned plates, if it indeed has such a program (and end date of said program if it has ended).
- Documents sufficient to show the total number of license plates scanned in your department's jurisdiction (whether the jurisdiction in this case is precisely or roughly represented) since the department began its plate-scanning program or first purchased access to such a program
- Documents sufficient to show the month and year your department first entered a program of persistent aerial surveillance, if it indeed has such a program (and end date of said program if it has ended).
- Documents sufficient to show the number of plane-hours of aerial surveillance (excluding monitoring roadways for speed infractions) purchased by your department within the dates at the top of this request. For example, one plane flying for four hours is four plane-hours. Two planes flying for four hours is eight plane-hours.
- Documents sufficient to show any attempt made by a representative of your department to inform the public about automatic license plate readers or persistent aerial surveillance. This could include but is not limited to records of town hall meetings, quotes from police spokespeople in local media, or text from the department's website.

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,

Brandon Smith

Hello Officer Broadway,

The Nevada Open Records Act makes no provision of

1. a requirement for in-person requests--which my colleagues and attorneys maintain places an undue burden on requesters, or

2. a requirement for requests on media letterhead--which clearly dissuades non-media-associated requesters from completing a freedom of information request with your department. Nevada's sunshine law opens government records to all citizens, regardless of affiliation with media.

For your clarification, I have pasted the relevant passages from the Nevada Open Records Act below.

Thank you for your continued assistance with processing my request.

Sincerely,
Brandon Smith

NRS 239.0107  Requests for inspection or copying of public books or records: Actions by governmental entities.

1.  Not later than the end of the fifth business day after the date on which the person who has legal custody or control of a public book or record of a governmental entity receives a written or oral request from a person to inspect, copy or receive a copy of the public book or record, a governmental entity shall do one of the following, as applicable:

(a) Except as otherwise provided in subsection 2, allow the person to inspect or copy the public book or record or, if the request is for the person to receive a copy of the public book or record, provide such a copy to the person.

(b) If the governmental entity does not have legal custody or control of the public book or record, provide to the person, in writing:

(1) Notice of that fact; and

(2) The name and address of the governmental entity that has legal custody or control of the public book or record, if known.

(c) Except as otherwise provided in paragraph (d), if the governmental entity is unable to make the public book or record available by the end of the fifth business day after the date on which the person who has legal custody or control of the public book or record received the request, provide to the person, in writing:

(1) Notice of that fact; and

(2) A date and time after which the public book or record will be available for the person to inspect or copy or after which a copy of the public book or record will be available to the person. If the public book or record or the copy of the public book or record is not available to the person by that date and time, the person may inquire regarding the status of the request.

(d) If the governmental entity must deny the person’s request because the public book or record, or a part thereof, is confidential, provide to the person, in writing:

(1) Notice of that fact; and

(2) A citation to the specific statute or other legal authority that makes the public book or record, or a part thereof, confidential.

2.  If a public book or record of a governmental entity is readily available for inspection or copying, the person who has legal custody or control of the public book or record shall allow a person who has submitted a request to inspect, copy or receive a copy of a public book or record.