Flock Me A Little Bit

Leave a comment

The next chapter in our Flock Me series is here! Today I received this email from the Visalia Police Department’s lawyers. (I’m going to have to ask why they have an out-of-town law firm doing this, and not the city attorney.)(UPDATE: It’s not actually an out-of-town firm. It’s a local, Visalia law firm. Not sure why I was thinking it’s an out-of-town company. Oops.)

I’ve sent them an image of my vehicle registration, so I hope to get the images of every time my car has been photographed by the system in Visalia. We’ll see.

Here’s the data on the agencies who can access the Visalia Police Department’s camera system. I’m going to have to study it a bit to figure out exactly what it means, and it does not (so far) answer the question of who *actually* accessed the data. This seems to indicate who is allowed to have access, which is not really what I asked. We’ll see if future information dumps include that little detail.

For those new to the saga of the Flock Automated License Plate Readers, here’s the blog posts I’ve done so far:

What the Flock?

Well, Flock me!

More Flock, more fun

Flock you later

Flock the Lawyers

They Never Told Me! (yes they did)

Leave a comment

Graphic by Gemini AI

From the “Nextdoor” app for my city:

From Jerry E.

I’m one of the neighbors whose curb was painted red and I was not notified at all. They just showed up and painted it without any warning

Has anyone else on Tulare Ave dealt with this or reached out to the city yet? Thank you neighbors for bringing this up and I believe more should bring this up before this becomes a bigger problem.

It irks me (a bit) to see things like this pop up in various forums. People get worked up about a project in their neighborhood, and complain that “I was not notified at all”. Well, yes, you were, you just weren’t paying attention (Unless you moved into the city and that neighborhood in the past week or so).

The City of Visalia is in the process of repaving most of Tulare Avenue. In that project, they’re changing the bike lanes, from ‘class 2’ to ‘class 4’. This improves safety for bicyclists by putting the bike lane next to the curb, and moving parking spaces out from their previous location at the curb to left of the bike lane. This puts parked cars closer to the traffic lanes, and people are freaking out. The redesign also eliminates some parking spaces on the street. People are not happy. Well, some people are not happy. People who ride their bikes are pleased with the changes. It moves them from having cars rushing by at 40 mph right next to them to having parking spaces or parked cars between them and the traffic. It’s a big improvement for safety, especially for children riding their bikes to school or elsewhere.

The complaints are three-fold.

The most vocal are those losing some or all of the on-street parking in front of their residence. They’re really not happy about that, and I can at least understand that attitude. I’ll be losing one of the two available spaces in front of my house when the project reaches me in August. I’ll adapt. Those that lose all of the parking have a legitimate complaint, but it is public property, and the project will improve biking safety. They’ll adapt.

Second are those who worry about parking their cars “out in the street”. The new configuration puts parked cars away from the curb, and closer to the traffic lanes.

They’re worried about the increased chance of a passing car drifting over and hitting their parked cars. This has happened already, but ‘side-swipe’ accidents already occur throughout the city on narrower streets. This is a legitimate concern, also, but you have this risk on many streets you might park on throughout any city. Some also worry about the heavy fog we sometimes get in Visalia.

The third complaint is about having to exit the driver side of the car into a traffic lane. This, too, is something we often have to do when parking in many areas of Visalia. Downtown is particularly bad about this condition. You simply have to be careful.

So that’s the background of the situation. Some nitty-gritty about the process:

The City of Visalia has been sending notices in the mail to residents living on and near Tulare Avenue for years. I first became aware of the project in 2021 or 2022 when a flyer arrived in my mailbox. I filled out an online survey about it at that time. I’ve attended three public information meetings about the plans, one at the Senior Center, one at Christ Lutheran Church, and one at Veva Blunt School. There have been those mailers, social media posts, and numerous discussions (fully noticed 72 hours in advance) at City Council meetings. I’ve spoken during the public comments sections several times about it. The newspapers in the area have carried articles about the changes.

It’s been thoroughly announced, but some folks simply pay no attention to such things until the work crews are tearing up the street in front of their house.

To see people complain that they didn’t know something was happening, and blame the city for not informing them, is just perplexing. I think to myself, “geez, what do you want? For them to spoon-feed you stuff you should already be paying attention to?”

The information has been out there for a long time. It’s not the city’s fault you ignored it.

<end rant>

Flock the Lawyers

Leave a comment

Oh my…

Now the City of Visalia is running it by the lawyers. It also manages to push the “final” date out to June 1, 2026.

As you’ll recall, my first post about it was “What the Flock?“, where I looked at all of the locations where Visalia Police Department (VPD) had installed cameras.

The next post was about a public records request I submitted to VPD concerning the cameras, “Well, Flock me!”

Another blogger, Paul Flores, had the AI system DeepSeek create an interesting look at what I was doing. “More Flock, More Fun

The first response to my Public Records request was this, “Flock you later“.

Tick Tock

I asked AI to profile me

Leave a comment

I asked Gemini AI to create a profile on me, so I could have it compare candidates for office in California’s primary election, and recommend who would be good choices for me to select for my votes. Here’s what it came up with.

This is the political profile I have developed for you, based strictly on the content and commentary found on your blogs, primarily jimmiejoe.com and alternatingcurrents.net. I have used this specific set of values and priorities to analyze candidate platforms and determine which individuals most closely align with your viewpoints in the 2026 California primary.

More

How I’m voting, 2026 CA Primary

1 Comment

Here’s how I’m voting in the California primary election for 2026.

With sixtyone(!) candidates on the ballot just for Governor, and sixteen for Lieutenant Governor, this ballot is a mess. The top two vote-getters for each office will move on to the general election in November. (For some offices on the ballot)

Since I recognize exactly zero of the candidates for many of these offices, I tried something I’ve never done before. I asked Gemini AI to create a political profile of me based on my blog posts here on Jimmiejoe.com, and at AlternatingCurrents.net. I then had it compare the profile of me it created to the public information of some of these candidates, and suggest which ones best match my politics. On some of the suggestions, it was difficult to choose between the top candidates who it said matched.

Here’s what we have. Not all of the candidates I’ve chosen were chosen with AI help.

More

Flock you later

Leave a comment

The Flock Automated License Plate Reader saga continues.

As you’ll recall, my first post about it was “What the Flock?“, where I looked at all of the locations where Visalia Police Department (VPD) had installed cameras.

The next post was about a public records request I submitted to VPD concerning the cameras, “Well, Flock me!”

Another blogger, Paul Flores, had the AI system DeepSeek create an interesting look at what I was doing. “More Flock, More Fun

Today, I got a notice from Visalia PD, advising me they were going to extend their deadline by fourteen days, as provided by law.

I didn’t think I was asking for that much, and I really expected to get very little, with them citing confidentiality laws! 😉

The timer is reset. tick tock

Congress is at it again

Leave a comment

I know it’s been going on for a long time, now, but I still find it annoying. Republicans in Congress are attacking transgender children, again, and trying to hide it in a misleading bill title.

H.R. 2616 is the “Parental Rights Over The Education and Care of Their Kids Act or the PROTECT Kids Act”. It of course does exactly the opposite of that.

From the Congress.gov website:

This bill requires public elementary and middle schools, as a condition of receiving certain federal funds for elementary and secondary education, to obtain parental consent before changing a student’s gender on school forms or changing a student’s sex-based accommodations.

Specifically, an elementary school or a school consisting of only grades 5-8 must obtain parental consent before changing a minor student’s (1) gender markers, pronouns, or preferred name on any school form; or (2) sex-based accommodations, including locker rooms or bathrooms.

A BILL

To require public elementary and middle schools that receive funds under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 to obtain parental consent before changing a minor’s gender markers, pronouns, or preferred name on any school form or sex-based accommodations, including locker rooms or bathrooms.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. Short title.

This Act may be cited as the “Parental Rights Over The Education and Care of Their Kids Act ” or the “PROTECT Kids Act”.

SEC. 2. Parental consent requirement related to gender markers, pronouns, and preferred names on school forms and sex-based accommodations.

(a) Requirement.—As a condition of receiving funds under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6301 et seq.), a public school that receives funds under such Act shall obtain parental consent before changing a covered student’s—

(1) gender markers, pronouns, or preferred name on any school form; or

(2) sex-based accommodations, including locker rooms or bathrooms.

(b) Definitions.—In this section:

(1) COVERED STUDENT.—The term “covered student” means a minor who is—

(A) an elementary school student; or

(B) a student in any of the middle grades.

(2) ESEA TERMS.—The terms “elementary school”, “middle grades”, and “parent” have the meanings given such terms in section 8101 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7801).

That’s it. That’s the entire bill. The entire intent is to out trans kids, regardless of the student’s wishes. Regardless of the hostility from family or the community. The child’s needs are irrelevant. Only the political points gained by the Republicans matter.

I sent a message to my Congressman, Vince Fong (R) about this bill, urging a NO vote. Here’s his response:

Dear Jim,

Thank you for reaching out to me regarding LGBTQ Americans.  I understand that many people have strong and differing opinions about this issue.  I take all of these views seriously and value the diversity of thought in our district. 

While I am opposed to policies that ignore the fundamental biological differences between men and women and have supported legislation to protect the integrity of Title IX, I believe those in Congress should respect the dignity of all citizens when debating legislation.

Over the last few decades, our political discourse across America has worsened. Instead of having productive negotiations, lawmakers have turned policy debates into uncontrollable arguments, opting instead for whatever gets the most retweets or soundbite coverage on network news. 

For too long, we have denied one another the chance to be seen not as a member of a particular political party, but as men and women with values, families and loved ones, and experiences that have shaped who we are and what we stand for. We must recommit ourselves to civility and respect one another as human beings no matter where we fall on the political spectrum.

Thank you again for contacting me.  Hearing about what is most important to you and your family helps me represent California’s 20th Congressional District to the best of my ability.  It is a great honor to serve you in the U.S. House of Representatives.  Should you have additional comments or questions, please feel free to contact me at my Bakersfield, Clovis, or Washington, D.C. offices.  

If you would like to receive regular updates to learn more about my legislative work on behalf of our neighbors and communities, please sign up for my newsletter below.

Sincerely,

I suspect if I were to have access to a “politi-speak” AI, and asked it to explain to me what he said in this response, it would return “not much”. He’s going to vote in support, I suspect, regardless of how this bill would hurt kids.

I wonder what the price of a Republican soul is these days? It must be an impressive payoff, as so many of them have signed on the dotted line so easily.

Oh, credit where credit is due. Fong’s office responded quicker to my message than any Representative or Senator, or Assemblyman or state Senator has in the past. It only took a couple of days to get a response. That’s unusual.

Well, Flock me!

Leave a comment

Flock ALPR, Visalia, California

Some more License Plate Reader fun. KMPH 26 posted a story about Merced’s Police Department discovering a, shall we say – just to be very understanding of the complexity of computerized systems – a “mis-configuration” of their automated license plate reader system. Although not the Flock ALPR, like Visalia’s, they released a statement on April 23, 2026, saying, in part, the following:

Merced, Calif – In the interest of transparency, the Merced Police Department is addressing recent concerns regarding automated license plate reader (ALPR) data sharing.

Following these reports, the Department conducted a comprehensive internal review of its ALPR system. That review determined that prior system configurations allowed data sharing with certain federal agencies.

Upon identifying this issue, the Department immediately disabled the identified connections and will continue to conduct additional audits to ensure ongoing compliance.

Merced joins Santa Cruz, Oxnard, and Ventura Police Departments to identify (through media reports, not, apparently, through their own oversight) problems with unauthorized access to their databases. Each agency has said they’ve fixed the problems, but one has to wonder how many other instances of unauthorized access have occurred.

I’ve sent the following Public Records Request to the Visalia Police Department:

To: Custodian of Records
Visalia Police Department
303 S Johnson St.
Visalia, CA 93291
(Or via NextRequest Portal)

Date: April 24, 2026

RE: CALIFORNIA PUBLIC RECORDS ACT REQUEST – FLOCK ALPR DATA SHARING AND SPECIFIC PLATE RECORDS

To the Custodian of Records:

Under the California Public Records Act (Gov. Code § 7920.000 et seq.) and California Civil Code § 1798.90.5 et seq., I am requesting the following public records held by the Visalia Police Department (VPD):

System Access & Inter-Agency Sharing Logs: Any and all records, audit logs, or documentation showing access to data compiled by the VPD via the Flock Safety ALPR system by any agency other than the Visalia Police Department. This request includes, but is not limited to:

Lists of “Hot List” hits shared with outside agencies.

Audit trails showing when outside agencies (federal, state, or local) queried the VPD’s Flock database.

Current lists of all agencies with whom the VPD has a data-sharing agreement for ALPR data.

The time frame for this request is from the initial installation/implementation of the Flock system to the present date.

Specific License Plate Records: All records, images, and data points captured by the VPD ALPR system (including fixed cameras and mobile units) that reference or identify the following California license plate: JJRJR.

This request includes time stamps, location data (GPS coordinates or camera IDs), and associated photographs for every instance this plate was recorded from the time of system installation to the present date.

Redactions and Privacy:
If the Department contends that any portion of these records is exempt from disclosure, please provide the non-exempt portions pursuant to Gov. Code § 7922.525. If any portion of the request is denied, please provide a written response citing the specific legal authority for the denial within the ten (10) days required by statute
.

Request for Digital Format:
Please provide these records in electronic format. If the records exist in a searchable database or spreadsheet (such as CSV or Excel), I request they be provided in that native format
.

Thank you for your assistance.

Sincerely,

Jimmie Joe Reeves
Visalia, CA

That license plate request is for my own car, and I’m interested how many times the system has seen me while I’m running around town. From what I understand of their operational rules, they should have no images older than 30 days. We’ll see if I get anything, or get buried with data files.

Hate In A Small Town 5 (Visalia Edition)

1 Comment

Since the Pride Month proclamation fiasco in Porterville, California, in the summer of 2013, I’ve written several blogs on ‘Hate In A Small Town’. You can find them here: Hate In A Small Town (1) 9-18-2014, Hate In A Small Town (2) 6-18-2014, Porterville City Council Still Snubbing LGBTQ Community 9-24-2014, and Hate In A Small Town 4 – It’s Déjà vu all over again 3-19-2025. The first blog was printed in the Weekend Edition of the Visalia Times Delta on September 21-22, 2013. Those blogs all dealt with a nearby city, Porterville, California. My city, Visalia, has been better about LGBTQ issues, for the most part, until this incident. (Not that Visalia has been a gay beacon, by any means. In 2002, the ACLU settled a lawsuit against the Visalia Unified School District, in which the District “agreed to adopt sweeping reforms to address anti-gay harassment, including groundbreaking measures to train staff and students with the goal of preventing harassment before it happens,” *see below for the Consent order)

The picture above started making the rounds on social media on Thursday, February 12, 2026. Here’s the background, as I know it at the time of this publication.

A class picture was taken in an auditorium, with some of the ASB officers wearing white t-shirts with lettering, designed to spell out “Always Legit Class of 2026”. See the image below.

The event was apparently also hosting freshman orientation, with students from feeder middle schools on campus. The current story circulating is that two eighth grade boys were seen holding hands, triggering the students in the above picture to spell out a homophobic slur, and have other students take pictures. It’s not known if the targets of the slur saw it in the moment, but they have certainly seen it on social media since. It’s also not clear where Redwood High School staff and teachers were during this incident, as they appear not to have put a stop to the students posing for the picture.

Students immediately posted to Instagram and other social media sites, and the shit hit the fan. “Going viral” doesn’t do justice to how those posts took off, and how they were received by the community.

Visalia Unified School District began immediate damage control. Click on ‘more’ for the rest of the story.

More

Part 2: Visalia City Charter – is the City following it’s “Constitution”?

Leave a comment

Visalia’s City Charter was adopted in 1923. It was updated in 1974, but only one change is obvious in the text. “Article XVI Miscellaneous Provisions Section 21. (Deleted November 4, 1974)” If anything else was changed, there are no indications in the current Charter. (That was a prohibition on city employees supporting a candidate for municipal office. I suspect that runs afoul of Constitutional rights): ARTICLE XVI. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
(Section 21. Neither the City Manager nor any person in the employ of the City shall take any active part in securing, or shall contribute money toward the nomination or election of any candidate for a municipal office.)

As I’ve been reading through it, I have some questions. They were originally triggered by the sections dealing with the city library, which we no longer have (it’s now a branch of the Tulare County Library). There are a few other things, too.

Ready to dive in? Click on ‘more’.

More

Older Entries