Another Flock of Cameras in Visalia

August 10, 2026

Jim Reeves 9-1-1, News, Personal , , , , , , , , , , Leave a comment

On July 14, 2026, I made the following Public Records Act request of the City of Visalia, and the Visalia Police Department:

Pursuant to the California Public Records Act (CPRA), California Government Code § 7920.000 et seq., I am writing to request copies of public records held by the City of Visalia and the Visalia Police Department (VPD) regarding the integration, access, sharing, or use of Automated License Plate Reader (ALPR) systems owned, operated, or deployed by certain private-sector entities.

Specifically, I request copies of all records, regardless of physical form or characteristics, from January 1, 2023, to the present, relating to the following three categories of private ALPR deployment:

1. Visalia Economic Development Corporation (VEDC) ALPR Systems

Agreements and Authorizations: Any Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs), contracts, operational agreements, data-sharing agreements, or software integration permissions allowing the Visalia Police Department (VPD) to access, receive, search, or query ALPR data, logs, “hot lists,” or real-time alerts generated by cameras owned, leased, or managed by the VEDC (including those deployed in the Visalia Industrial Park).

Correspondence: All correspondence (including emails, text messages, and written memos) between the City of Visalia officials, staff, or representatives, VPD personnel and representatives, contractors, or board members of the VEDC (including but not limited to Executive Director Bruce Nicotero) regarding the installation, funding, maintenance, or law enforcement usage of VEDC-managed ALPR cameras.

Locations: Physical location of all cameras to which VPD has been granted access.

2. Home Depot Corporation ALPR Systems

Data-Sharing & Integration: Any agreements, MOUs, API integration credentials, or authorizations (via third-party platforms such as Flock Safety, Vigilant Solutions, or similar vendors) enabling VPD to query or receive automatic alerts from ALPR/surveillance systems operating at or around the Visalia Home Depot location (located at 3500 W. Orchard Ave.).

Correspondence: All communications between City staff or VPD personnel and Home Depot corporate security, store management, or representing investigators concerning ALPR data access, direct feeds, or digital “hot list” coordination.

3. Lowe’s Corporation ALPR Systems

Data-Sharing & Integration: Any agreements, MOUs, API integration credentials, or authorizations enabling VPD to query or receive automatic alerts from ALPR/surveillance systems operating at or around the Visalia Lowe’s locations (located at 1400 S. Demaree St. and 3020 N. Demaree St.).

Correspondence: All communications between City Staff, VPD personnel, and Lowe’s corporate security, store management, or representing investigators concerning ALPR data access, direct feeds, or digital “hot list” coordination.

Format of Records: I request that these records be provided in their original electronic format (e.g., PDF, Excel, .msg, or .eml) to avoid unnecessary printing costs and to preserve metadata.

Fee Waiver/Limitation: If there are any administrative fees associated with searching or duplicating these records, please notify me before they are incurred. (As these records concern public safety technology oversight and civil liberties, they are in the public interest, and I request a waiver of any fees).

Severability and Redactions: If the City determines that certain portions of the requested records are exempt from disclosure (such as specific law enforcement investigative techniques under Gov. Code § 7923.600), please disclose all reasonably segregable, non-exempt portions of the records with appropriate redactions, accompanied by a written explanation citing the specific statutory exemption.

As provided by Government Code § 7922.535, I look forward to receiving your determination on this request within 10 days of receipt.

On July 28, 2026, I received this notice (a bit past their ten-day required response window):

To whom it may concern:

The Visalia Police Department is diligently working on your request. Per Government Code 7922.535(b) we will be utilizing the fourteen-day extension to fulfill your request. Thank you for your patience.

July 28, 2026, 4:42pm by Staff

Today, August 10, 2026, I received this email:

2026.08.10_Flock_Visalia_Lowes_HDDownload

They’re still looking, by golly!

Lowe’s shopping center, on South Mooney Blvd, Visalia. Image from Deflock.org.

Lowe’s Shopping center, Riggin and Demaree, Visalia. Image from Deflock.org.

I don’t know if the Visalia Home Depot has cameras, but I’ve read they grant law enforcement access to those they do have, so I want to see if there’s an agreement with Home Depot about it.

More tick tock tick Flock.

As is my practice, here are the previous blog posts about Flock Automated License Plate Readers in Visalia, California.

  1. What the Flock?
  2. Well, Flock Me!
  3. More Flock, more fun
  4. Flock you later
  5. Flock the Lawyers
  6. Flock Me A Little Bit
  7. Tick tock tick Flock
  8. The Final Flock – and the answer is “NO”
  9. Hidden in the Flock
  10. Reason me this, Flock
  11. Flock Me – Round 2

Flock Me – Round 2

August 7, 2026

Jim Reeves commentary, geek, News, Personal , , , , , , , , , Leave a comment

In my post, “The Final Flock – and the answer is “NO”, the City of Visalia closed out my Public Records Request without providing all of the information I requested, citing privacy laws, and police department policy.

2026.08.03 RB Ltr to J. Reeves (final)Download

Sorry, that’s not good enough. I’m trying again. Today, August 7, 2026, I’ve filed the following supplemental Public Records Request:

“RE: Formal Public Records Request & Demand for Disclosure — Personal ALPR Data (Plate: JJRJR)

Supplemental to PRAR Dated April 24, 2026 / Response Dated August 3, 2026

Dear Custodian of Records and Ms. Berglund:

I am writing to formally request—and respectfully demand—the release of public records pursuant to the California Public Records Act (CPRA), California Government Code § 7920.000 et seq. This letter serves as a specific, narrow request following the supplemental response issued by Herr Pedersen & Berglund LLP on August 3, 2026 regarding my initial April 24, 2026 request.

1. Scope of Request

Pursuant to the CPRA, I request copies of all Automated License Plate Reader (ALPR) records, data files, metadata logs, and associated digital images captured or maintained by the Visalia Police Department (including fixed cameras and mobile units) that reference or identify the following California license plate registered to me:

  • License Plate: JJRJR
  • Time Period: The 30-day period immediately preceding and ending on the date this written demand is received by the City/Department.

2. Legal Basis and Response to Department Denials

The City’s August 3, 2026 response asserts that raw ALPR data is exempt under the CPRA balancing test (Gov. Code § 7922.000), cites Department Policy 428.2 stating ALPR data is “not open to public review,” and references Civil Code § 1798.90.55 regarding transfers to non-public agencies. Respectfully, these assertions misapply established California case law and statutory rules regarding individual requests for personal records.

A. Rejection of Blanket Exemptions (ACLU v. Superior Court)

In ACLU Found. v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County (2017) 3 Cal.5th 1032, the California Supreme Court explicitly held that routine ALPR data collection is not automatically exempt as an investigative record (Gov. Code § 7923.600) because the scans are indiscriminately gathered rather than generated for a targeted inquiry. Furthermore, the Court established that agencies cannot issue blanket denials or rely on generalized privacy claims to withhold all ALPR records.

B. Absence of Privacy Exemption for the Subject Citizen

The primary justification for withholding raw ALPR data under the CPRA balancing test (Gov. Code § 7922.000) is protecting the privacy of individual vehicle owners. However, when an individual requests their own vehicle’s records, the privacy interest belongs entirely to the requester. Releasing location records of license plate JJRJR to the registered owner of plate JJRJR poses zero invasion of personal privacy. The privacy protections of the CPRA exist to safeguard citizens from government intrusion, not to shield public agencies from disclosing non-sensitive records to the data subject.

C. Statutory Duty to Segregate and Disclose (Gov. Code § 7922.525)

California Government Code § 7922.525 mandates that “any reasonably segregable portion of a record shall be available for inspection by any person requesting the record after the deletion of the portions that are exempted by law.”

To the extent the Department contends that releasing raw database files might expose third-party details or systemic operational configurations, the law requires the Department to redact or segregate those exempt elements and release the non-exempt data points (i.e., timestamps, coordinates/locations, and images matching plate JJRJR).

D. Misapplication of Civil Code § 1798.90.55 and Internal Policy

Civil Code § 1798.90.55 prohibits ALPR operators from selling, sharing, or transferring ALPR information to commercial entities or non-public agency third parties for private commercial use. It does not override an agency’s statutory obligations under the CPRA to release records to a requesting citizen. Furthermore, local agency policy (such as VPD Policy 428.2) cannot supersede state statutory law or Supreme Court precedent.

3. Requested Action & Timelines

Because this request is narrow, limited strictly to a single license plate over a 30-day window, and involves an individual seeking their own vehicle data, it presents minimal administrative burden to locate and process.

Pursuant to California Government Code § 7922.535, please provide a determination within 10 calendar days of receipt of this letter as to whether the City will comply with this request. If the Department asserts that any portion of the requested 30-day dataset or images remains exempt, please cite the specific statutory exemption for each redacted or withheld portion and demonstrate how the public interest in withholding clearly outweighs the public interest in disclosure under Government Code § 7922.000.

Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter and your continued service to our community. I look forward to receiving your response and the responsive data files.”

We’ll see if that shakes loose my data stored on the Flock Automated License Plate Reader system employed by the Visalia Police Department. I’m crossing my fingers, but not holding my breath.

As in my previous posts, here are my blogs about the Flock adventure I’ve been on:

  1. What the Flock?
  2. Well, Flock Me!
  3. More Flock, more fun
  4. Flock you later
  5. Flock the Lawyers
  6. Flock Me A Little Bit
  7. Tick tock tick Flock
  8. The Final Flock – and the answer is “NO”
  9. Hidden in the Flock
  10. Reason me this, Flock

“Reason” me this, Flock

August 6, 2026

Jim Reeves 9-1-1, geek, News, Personal , , , , , , , , , , Leave a comment

Cartoon image by Gemini AI

In June of 2026, Visalia Police Department decided they no longer wanted the public to know why they were accessing the Flock Automated License Plate Reader system.

Let’s look at Visalia PD’s “Transparency Page” .CSV file for two different 30 day periods this year. Here’s the one starting on May 5, 2026, which contains the “reason” field in the log.

From the left to the right, we see the following ; an ID number, apparently coded. The “user ID” is merely asterisks. No public idea who is accessing the data. Next is the date and time, in “Zulu” time, which is UTC, which is Greenwich Mean Time. (London, England) Next is the number of “networks” being searched. I don’t know if this means number of cameras, or number of agencies, businesses, and organizations. The final field is “reason”. Each search of the database requires a reason for the search. They’ve told us each access requires a case number, but it’s never been listed on the public facing page. As it is, some of the “reason” entries are simply meaningless. More on that in a bit.

Now, starting sometime in June of 2026, VPD has removed the “reason” field from the file. I’m going to assume it’s visible on their side of the site (all of this stuff sits on Flock servers, requiring users to log in and access the information remotely), but we can no longer see it. Our “transparency” is becoming more opaque.

More

Hidden in the Flock

August 4, 2026

Jim Reeves geek, News, Personal , , , , , , , , , , Leave a comment

Gemini AI image

Flock Automated License Plate readers have been increasingly in the news recently, as problems with the surveillance system have come to light. Many communities have begun to re-think their use of Flock. Los Angeles PD is one large agency that has decided to revisit their use, and has put renewing their subscription on hold for now. Here are my thoughts on Flock and other similar license plate reader operations.

In a perfect world, computer-based information systems like Flock would be a powerful tool for law enforcement. Put in a license plate number, or a vehicle description, and given enough cameras in the system, pinpoint where a stolen car went (or is), find a missing elderly person who drove off and has become confused on how to get home, or a myriad of other scenarios that might benefit from accessing such a database.

The problem is, we don’t live in a perfect world.

More

The Final Flock – and the answer is: “NO”

August 3, 2026

Jim Reeves commentary, News, Personal , , , , , , , , , , Leave a comment

It started April 24, 2026. I filed a public records request for information on the Flock Automated License Plate Reader system the City of Visalia was utilizing. Today, August 3, 2026, I got the final response. Basically, “NO”. The only thing they sent me that was not readily available on the Visalia Police Department Flock Transparency page was a list of “audits”, reporting which agencies had access to Visalia’s Flock network. It was in the tens of thousands of PDF pages. What that revealed is a whole blog post in itself, perhaps at a later date. (I did not see any evidence in those pages of any non-California agencies accessing Visalia Police Department’s database, such as ICE or Homeland Security. There’s a loop-hole about that, however.)

2026.08.03 RB Ltr to J. Reeves (final)Download

The only thing they were willing to tell me about my vehicle being identified, cataloged, and stored in the Flock database was that they didn’t have any record of Visalia PD checking for my plate. I suppose that’s good. Of course, it doesn’t mean that they haven’t, after my request.

Here are the blog posts I’ve made during this investigation:

  1. “What the Flock?” My first notice of the Flock cameras in Visalia.
  2. “Well, Flock Me!” Stories about agencies cancelling their Flock contracts due to violations of state law by Flock.
  3. “More Flock, More Fun” Another blogger runs the stuff I’ve done through an AI for analysis.
  4. “Flock You Later” The Police Department opts to take their allowed 14 day extension to respond to my request.
  5. “Flock the Lawyers” The Police Department hands my request off to the City’s lawyers. That’s seldom a good sign.
  6. “Flock Me A Little Bit” They send me the list of which agencies can access VPD Flock data, and want me to prove the license plate I asked about is mine.
  7. “Tick Tock Tick Flock” The lawyers dump a huge file on me, with audit logs of agencies that accessed Visalia’s Flock data. Want to know the biggest user, by far? California Highway Patrol. They routinely check thousands of camera files.

So they’ve decided “…data is exempt from public disclosure under the public records act balancing test because the public interest in preventing disclosure clearly outweighs the public interest in disclosure…” and “Visalia PD’s policy “Because such data may contain confidential information, it is not open to public view.” (Policy 428.2.)”

They took 14 weeks to determine they wouldn’t give me data on myself. Due diligence, or deliberate delay?

This story is not over.

Image by Gemini AI

2FAG6OTS – Redwood High School – Visalia Unified School District

August 1, 2026

Jim Reeves commentary, News, Personal , , , , , , , , , , , Leave a comment

How the Redwood High School Senior Picture Event Became An International News Story, And How The Visalia Unified School District Responded.

Thursday, February 12, 2026, was Senior class picture day at Redwood High School, in Visalia. An incident at that photo shoot would blow up social media, and garner world-wide attention. As members of the senior class were arranging themselves on bleachers for a panorama photo, a group of ASB members were on the side of the gym, getting ready to take their place on the front two rows, dressed in white T-shirts with letters printed on them, to spell out “ALWAYS LEGIT CLASS OF 2026”.

Unfortunately, about ten students took the opportunity to spell out something else, while the adults in the room were distracted. They arranged themselves to spell out the homophobic slur, “2FAG6OTS”, and quickly posted them to social media. The resulting storm hit almost immediately.

The following post details the events as they occurred, based on the information provided to me by Visalia Unified School District after a public records request made on April 17, 2026. After waiting several months for the information, I received the final document dump on July 27, 2026. There are many records not released due to confidentiality laws (which is completely understandable) and “attorney work product privilege”. This blog is based on the released documents, and therefore will not reflect all of the relevant information regarding the incident. This, however, is what we have.

More

Mt. Whitney High School – Oak Tree status

July 21, 2026

Jim Reeves commentary, News, Personal , , , , , , Leave a comment

On Tuesday, July 21, 2026, the Visalia Unified School District held a meeting in the Mt. Whitney High School library, regarding expansion plans for the campus. Dominate in the minds of many at the meeting was the fate of several large oak trees.

One is dedicated to the “winningest coach in Pioneer history”, Douglas P. Rudolf, with a water fountain (his mantra was “hydrate!”) and sitting area created around the large oak tree. The proposed building you see in the lower left of the image above will sit where the tree is now. The other trees seen in the first picture also stand in the proposed building’s footprint. The alumni and general community did not like that idea. VUSD held a meeting to do damage control.

The lower building is new construction. The building above it is currently the administration building (and some classrooms on the second level, at least when I went there in 1972-1976), and is slated to be demolished and a new building put in it’s place. Several other oak trees are in the construction zones.

When word got out, the uproar was immediate. School staff, the wider Visalia community, and Mt. Whitney alumni (class of ’76 for me) let it be known destruction of that one specific tree was a non-starter, and the loss of the other trees was concerning, as well. They demanded changes to the plans. VUSD sent the Superintendent to try and smooth the ruffled feathers. If his words end up being the facts, it might have worked.

Superintendent Kirk Shrum said in the meeting that the District recognized the importance of the tree(s), and every effort would be taken to protect them. Action at the next Board of Trustees meeting is to hire and pay the architect to begin designing the new buildings, including their placement on the Mt. Whitney campus. The architect will be studying the design of the building(s), utilities, and the trees when designs begin. Placement of the building(s) may be able to be adjusted to protect the trees.

The next steps are to analyze the grounds, do the environmental studies, and determine the exact features of the buildings. Staff and committees will work on the plans, and Shrum insisted the preservation of the tree(s) would be a driving focus.

But.

If they can’t make it work any other way (according to them), the trees will come down.

(Removing optimist’s hat, putting on cynic’s hat)

I hope the words spoken at the meeting are what come to pass, and the school’s newest buildings can be built without destroying these ancient giants. I’m concerned that lip-service will be paid to their preservation, and at the last possible moment it will be determined that they “have” to be removed. It would be a great loss to the community.

The Mt. Whitney Yearbook is “The Oak”. It would be a shame if there were no more of them on campus after this project is completed in four or five years.

Tulare County GOP Lies in political post

July 21, 2026

Jim Reeves commentary, News, Personal , , , , , , Leave a comment

Screenshot

Tulare County’s Republican party is taking a page right out of Donald Trump’s playbook: Lie about your opponents. Why would they do that?

Here are some reasons.

One big one is they are desperate for someone to run against a popular City Council member, Emmanuel Hernandez Soto, and are trying again to smear him with lies. Back in September, they tried to run Soto off the council by saying he was “sympathizing with those who justified the assassination of Charlie Kirk”. That, of course, is a lie. Here’s what really happened.

I wrote a Facebook post, in which I said the following:

I’m afraid I don’t have much sympathy to spare for one particular victim out of the hundreds that will be injured by guns today in the United States. Many of them will die from their wounds. Most are innocent of any crime, and are victims of the easy availability of guns in this country.

Charlie Kirk may die because of the hate he fed our country. He has consistently attacked various communities, spreading lies and hatred. It’s not surprising to me that someone finally broke, and fought back.

Violence is only acceptable to me in immediate self-defense, but that’s never really been what this society has taught its members. The easy availability and glorification of guns has turned what in the past would have been fistfights into shootings.

Whether Kirk lives or dies, he’s now a martyr for the christo-fascists and Christian nationalists. They won’t take the lesson that hate breeds violence, they’ll go after the same minority groups they always have, but with more fervor than ever before.

In the next hours, claims will rocket around the internet that the shooter was gay, or transgender, or an illegal alien, or an atheist, or an Islamic terrorist, or…

Now we wait. Will Kirk live or die? Will the shooter be caught? What were their motivations? How did they acquire the weapon?

The only ones I really feel sorry for are his children. They don’t understand why this happened to their daddy. They don’t deserve this pain.

Soto “liked” my Facebook post. Desperate to get another Republican on the Visalia City Council, the local GOP jumped. They tried to skew my post to mean I was justifying the murder of Kirk (it wasn’t an assassination – Kirk wasn’t that important), and by “liking” my post, Soto was justifying it, too. Of course, that’s not what I said, and that’s not what it meant.

That didn’t stop the Republicans of Tulare County. Ten people got up and spoke at a City Council meeting on September 15, 2025, strong in their performative outrage at Soto. They called for his resignation. He did not resign.

Their post claims Soto “consistently votes against District 4’s best interests”. They then claim he voted against Chik-Fil-A and Sam’s Club, but did not provide the dates for those votes.

They really shouldn’t open the “District 4’s best interest” can of worms, though.

Checking the minutes available on the City’s website as of publication date, Soto’s record in the last 71 votes show him voting with the majority 60 times. He voted “NO”, or voted “YES” with the minority, 3 times. He was absent (for his wedding) for 11 votes. (these are total votes, not number of council meetings)

Soto votes with the majority at just under 85% of the time.

If Tulare GOP wants to claim he “consistently votes against the city’s and District 4’s best interests”, they need to admit so do all of the other Council members.

But, as is the case with MAGA and the GOP, facts don’t matter. Tell the lies, because nobody in the base will check what you say. The only priority is to get someone they think of as “liberal” off the council, and fill that seat with a conservative they can control. They can’t control Soto, and that frosts them.

If you live in District 4, vote Soto this November.

VUSD Public Records Request – update

July 16, 2026

Jim Reeves commentary, News, Personal , , , , , , , , , Leave a comment

On April 17, 2026, I filed a Public Records Request with the Visalia Unified School District. You can read the request and the reasons for it (the “f-word” incident at Redwood High School) here. On April 27, I got a response, which is covered here.

They indicated they’d respond by May 18, 2026. At that point, they informed me they DID have “responsive records”, and would provide further by June 17, 2026. On June 17, 2026, I got an email with some information requested in the PRA request, and informing me the date was pushed to July 17, 2026, for further response. (I’m sensing a pattern here.)

Well, it’s July 16, 2026, and I just received this email:

Response – 2026-07-16 Correspondence to Jim ReevesDownload

Everybody’s on vacation, so they need another week. New target date: July 23, 2026.

Don’t hold your breath.

Tick tock tick Flock

July 13, 2026

Jim Reeves geek, News, Personal , , , , , , , , , 1 Comment

Visalia Police Department Public Records Request – update

On April 19, 2026, I posted “What the Flock?“, my first entry about the proliferation of Flock Automated License Plate Readers in Visalia, California.

On April 24, 2026, I posted “Well, Flock Me!“, about a nearby community (Merced, California) disabling their Flock ALPR system after problems with unauthorized access were discovered. On that same day, I filed a Public Records Request with the Visalia Police Department, about Visalia’s recent installation of Flock cameras. The City had ten days to respond.

On May 5, 2026, I posted “Flock you later“, where the City of Visalia takes advantage of a 14 day extension to provide the requested documents.

On May 11, 2026, I posted “Flock the Lawyers“, wherein the City informs me they have to run it past the lawyers first, and they were targeting June 1, 2026 for release of the documents.

On May 27, 2026, “Flock Me A Little Bit” is the next chapter, in which the City is initially refusing to provide some of the requested documentation, since I was requesting the images in the system of a particular license plate. My license plate. I sent them a copy of my vehicle registration. The next target date for complying with my request was June 20, 2026.

On June 29, 2026, I posted to Facebook, tagging both the City of Visalia and the Visalia Police Department, that they were nine days past their own due date for information. That was at 1pm. By 3pm, I received a “supplemental response to your public records request”, via email. This response stated “The attached document shows the result of a Department audit searching for any monitoring and investigating activity for JJRJR. No data exists.” Except that wasn’t what I asked them to provide. I had no reason to suspect the Police Department deliberately did a search for my license plate, for whatever reason. What I asked for was every instance of my plate being recorded by the system. Those are two different things. They are not going to convince me that my plate has never been recorded by their system.

In that response, they also moved the date again. More information was supposed to be available July 20, 2026.

On July 10, 2026, I received this letter, and a link to a DropBox file with audit logs.

2026.07.10 RB Ltr to J.ReevesDownload

There are tens of thousands of pages (PDF file pages) in response to this part of my request. In case the link in the letter doesn’t work, you can see them at my Dropbox, at this link: https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fo/6u6l4w0jwe54w6y1fvllu/AAZ4mAaSF8XPUJfqUpd2lwo?rlkey=iuqasfx1t6r8hhwgz02h36us1&st=qkgkdqht&dl=0

They state “The Department’s staff is continuing its diligent search and review of requested records. The Department’s staff members estimate they will be able to supplement this response on or about August 20, 2026, earlier if able.”

Tick tock tick Flock

Older Entries