Image by Gemini AI
10192026_tally_refusalDownload

Now even knowing only the number of times my plate was registered in the Flock network is a “privacy” concern. And since the California state law doesn’t specifically state they have to provide this information, they’re refusing. Here’s my (and Gemini’s) response:

October 20, 2026

Rachele Berglund, Esq.

Herr Pedersen & Berglund LLP

Attorneys for Visalia Police Department

RE: Response to Determination on Public Records Act Request #26-1986 (License Plate JJRJR ALPR Count)

Dear Ms. Berglund:

Thank you for your response dated October 19, 2026, regarding CPRA Request #26-1986. I am writing to clarify the legal basis of my request, address the exemptions asserted in your determination, and narrow the scope of the request to assist the Visalia Police Department in fulfilling its statutory duties.

1. Database Extraction Is Not “Record Creation” Under California Law

Your response states that no record containing the requested tally exists and that the CPRA does not require the Department to create a new record. While I agree that agencies are not required to generate custom written reports or conduct legal synthesis, the California Supreme Court has clarified how this rule applies to electronic databases.

Under Gov. Code § 7922.570 (formerly § 6253.9) and the California Supreme Court’s decision in National Lawyers Guild v. City of Hayward (2020) 9 Cal.5th 1178, performing a search query or extracting compiled data from an existing government database does not constitute the creation of a new record. The underlying raw ALPR data exists within the software system maintained and used by the Department. Executing a search in the Flock software interface for a specific license plate over a 30-day window to yield a hit count is a standard data extraction process under Gov. Code § 7922.575, not the manufacturing of non-existent data.

2. The ACLU Privacy Exemption Is Inapplicable to an Aggregate Count

Your response relies on ACLU Foundation of Southern California v. Superior Court (2017) 3 Cal.5th 1032 and the catch-all exemption (Gov. Code § 7922.000) to argue that disclosure implicates privacy interests regarding vehicle locations and movements.

The privacy concerns highlighted in ACLU center on location tracking—specifically, GPS coordinates, timestamps, and contextual photographs that reveal individual travel patterns over time. My request explicitly excludes all location data, GPS coordinates, timestamps, photographs, and officer details. A single, aggregate numerical count contains zero location or tracking information and therefore does not compromise personal privacy. Under the balancing test of Gov. Code § 7922.000, the public interest in understanding the scope of local ALPR system usage clearly outweighs any privacy claim attached to an isolated number.

3. Modified and Narrowed Request Scope

To minimize administrative burden and resolve the jurisdictional objections raised regarding third-party feeds under Gov. Code § 7920.530, I am revising and narrowing my request as follows:

Narrowed Request:
I request an electronic export or system-generated query summary showing the total numerical count of recorded instances in which California license plate JJRJR was recorded, captured, or logged during the most recent 30-day retention period, restricted exclusively to ALPR cameras owned, leased, or directly operated by the Visalia Police Department.
As before, this request explicitly excludes dates, timestamps, geographical locations, GPS coordinates, vehicle photos, context images, officer names, and associated case numbers.

4. Statutory Duty to Assist (Gov. Code § 7922.600)

Under Gov. Code § 7922.600, public agencies have an affirmative duty to assist requesters in identifying records and information that are responsive to the request, describing the information technology and physical location in which the records exist, and providing suggestions for overcoming any practical obstacles to disclosure.

If the Department maintains that entering a license plate query into its ALPR user interface to generate a result count presents a technical obstacle, please outline the specific technical limitations under Gov. Code § 7922.600 so we can reach a practical resolution.

Please confirm receipt of this modified request and advise when the responsive data extraction will be provided.

Sincerely,

Jimmie Joe Reeves, Jr.

*****************

We’ll see if this budges them on releasing the information. I’m not holding my breath.