Boulder Flock ALPRs

To Whom It May Concern:

Pursuant to the Colorado Open Records Act, I hereby request the following records:

1. ALPR Locations: Please provide the precise location of each Flock Safety ALPR camera deployed and utilized by Boulder Police Department.
2. Email Communications with Flock Safety: All email communications between Boulder Police Department and Flock Safety between July 1, 2021 and the present.
3. Hotlist Criteria: Please provide documentation of policies detailing the criteria and procedures for creating and verifying entries on hotlists in Flock Safety's ALPR system. Specifically:
a. Criteria for adding entries to hotlists (e.g., offense types, jurisdictional warrants, etc.)
b. Verification and approval processes before hotlist alerts are actionable
4. Data-Sharing Agreements: List of all agencies with whom Boulder Police Department shares ALPR data, both within Colorado and out-of-state, including federal entities.
5. Policies on ALPR Use and Oversight: Any formal policies or guidelines related to:
a. Acceptable and prohibited uses of ALPR data, including specific restrictions and permissible use cases
b. Access policy, including what constitutes a “valid reason” (https://transparency.flocksafety.com/boulder-co-pd) for system access
c. Human verification procedures for hotlist alerts before law enforcement action
6. Access Logs and Audits: Any access logs, audits, compliance reports, or oversight records evaluating the use, accuracy, and policy compliance of Boulder Police Department’s ALPR systems between January 1, 2022 and the present.

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 3 business days, as the statute requires.

Sincerely,

William Freeman

Hi,

I'd like to follow up on my request from November 5th. The three working day period has elapsed, and I haven't received a written explanation of extenuating circumstances. When can I expect to receive the records? Please let me know if there's any confusion about what records I'm requesting or any unexpected obstacles, and I'll be happy to revise it or help specify what records would help fulfill the request.

Thank you,

William Freeman

Hi again,

I wanted to check on the status of this request. I visited your office in person Tuesday 11/19 and was told that Records doesn't have direct access to the requested materials and that the request was forwarded to another area of the PD. I appreciate your efforts and the quick acknowledgement of this request, but Colorado law requires a response within three working days unless a written explanation of extenuating circumstances is provided.

I'd be happy to meet in person with someone who has access to these records and help guide them through the process. I know a little bit about how Flock's systems work, and I can help whoever has access export the data if that's necessary or helpful. Please let me know when I can expect a response.

Thank you,

William Freeman

Hi Gloria,

Thanks for letting me know about the attachment error.

I am writing to appeal the denial of my records request for the precise locations of Flock Safety ALPR cameras deployed by the Boulder Police Department, as well as to request a fee waiver for the production of all requested records. My appeal is based on the following points:

1. Public Interest in Transparency and Accountability
The public has a legitimate interest and right to understand how and where public-facing surveillance technologies are deployed in their communities. ALPR systems, including Flock Safety Falcon cameras, have been widely criticized for privacy violations and documented cases of misuse. Transparent disclosure of their placement helps ensure these technologies are used fairly and equitably. By denying access to this information, the department hinders public oversight and accountability.

2. Insufficient Justification for Denial
The cited provision under § 24-72-305(5), which allows withholding intelligence and security information if disclosure is contrary to the public interest, has not been adequately justified in this case. The denial does not explain how the release of ALPR camera locations would compromise intelligence or security operations. Generic claims of risk are insufficient to justify withholding records under this statute. Courts have repeatedly emphasized the need for agencies to provide clear, specific reasoning when claiming exemptions.

Further, ALPR cameras, including the Flock Safety Falcon models deployed by your department, are installed in public spaces and are visible to anyone passing by. Their physical presence in public areas negates any reasonable claim that their locations constitute sensitive intelligence information.

3. Bluetooth Broadcasts Undermine the Security Argument
Flock Safety Falcon cameras actively broadcast their presence via Bluetooth signals, making them inherently discoverable to anyone with a Bluetooth-enabled device. This fact significantly undermines any argument that their locations are covert or sensitive infrastructure. A system that publicly announces its location cannot reasonably be classified as protected intelligence information.

4. Precedents of Disclosure Elsewhere
Other agencies across the country have voluntarily disclosed ALPR locations without any adverse effects on law enforcement operations. This demonstrates that disclosure is not inherently detrimental to public interest. For example, departments in Nashville, TN and Atherton, CA have provided this information as part of their public accountability measures. Boulder PD’s position stands in contrast to these transparency efforts.

Fee Waiver Request
Given the public interest in this matter, I also request a waiver of any fees associated with fulfilling my entire request. The information sought pertains directly to public accountability and the fair use of surveillance technology, which are matters of significant public concern. Charging fees would create a barrier to transparency and disproportionately burden individuals seeking to ensure accountability.

Additionally, the overdue response, denial, and subsequent appeal process have caused unnecessary delays, further justifying a fee waiver as a matter of equity.

In Summary, I respectfully request that the Boulder Police Department reconsider its decision and provide the requested information in full, along with granting a fee waiver. Transparency in the deployment of surveillance technologies is essential for maintaining public trust and ensuring equitable practices.

Thank you for your time and consideration. I look forward to your prompt response.

Sincerely,
William Freeman

Hi Gloria,

In response to the 3-hour estimate to review email communication, I'd like to amend item 2 of my request (email communications with Flock Safety) to make it easier to fulfill the request. Instead of "all email communications," I request:

Metadata for email communications between Boulder Police Department and representatives of Flock Safety between July 1, 2021 and the present, specifically emails sent to and received from email addresses ending in “@flocksafety.com”. The specific metadata points I’m requesting are from address, to address(es), cc address(es), bcc address(es), date/time sent, date/time received, subject line, and names of all attachments. This request does not seek the contents of the emails themselves, only the specified metadata.

This should eliminate the need to review the content of emails and attachments for sensitive information warranting redaction and greatly reduce the time needed to fulfill the request.

Thank you,

Will Freeman

Gloria,

Thank you for your prompt response to my request. I appreciate the detailed explanation of the reasoning for denying the precise locations of Flock Safety ALPR cameras. However, I must respectfully appeal your decision once again, as your justification under CRS §24-72-305(5) is speculative and does not adequately address the arguments I previously raised.

1. Flaws in the Intelligence and Security Argument
Your response argues that releasing a comprehensive list of ALPR camera locations would jeopardize the department’s ability to investigate criminal activity and maintain community security. This justification is problematic for the following reasons:

Public Accessibility of Camera Locations:
These cameras are installed in public spaces, where they are visible to anyone passing by. Furthermore, as I noted, Flock Safety cameras actively broadcast their presence via Bluetooth, making them inherently discoverable by anyone with a Bluetooth-enabled device. The argument that these locations constitute sensitive intelligence or security information is undermined by the fact that the cameras’ physical presence and broadcasts already reveal their locations. If you're hesitant to take my word for it, see https://deflock.me, https://wigle.net, and https://sunders.uber.space. Each of these sites will show the information I'm requesting, as reported by community members, licensed under ODbL.

Speculative Risks Are Not Grounds for Withholding:
While your response speculates that a list of locations might enable individuals to avoid detection or tamper with cameras, there is no evidence to support that releasing this information has caused such harm in other jurisdictions. By the same logic, one could argue that providing a list of bank locations enables bank robberies, yet such information is readily available to the public without compromising security. Courts have repeatedly held that agencies must provide clear, specific reasoning—not hypothetical risks—when invoking exemptions for intelligence and security information.

Precedents of Transparency:
As I mentioned previously, other police departments, such as those in Nashville, TN, and Atherton, CA, have disclosed ALPR locations without adverse effects on their operations. These precedents suggest that transparency in this context does not inherently jeopardize security or investigations.

2. Fee Policy Clarification
Your email indicates that my amended request has been forwarded for review and a cost estimate. However, as per Colorado Open Records Act (CORA) requirements, a government entity may only charge for research and retrieval if it has published its fee policy on its website or in another written form prior to the date the request was received. Please provide a link to or documentation of Boulder Police Department’s fee policy, including specific provisions for research and retrieval costs, as required by law.

3. Appeal of Denial and Next Steps
Given the insufficient justification for withholding the requested information and the lack of response to my fee waiver request, I must appeal this decision once again. Should my appeal not be resolved in a manner consistent with CORA and the public interest, I am prepared to pursue further action, including litigation if necessary.

Transparency in the deployment of public-facing surveillance technologies is essential for accountability and public trust. I urge the department to reconsider its position and release the requested information.

Please let me know if you require any additional information from me to assist in this process.

Thank you for your time and attention. I look forward to your response.

Happy Thanksgiving,
William Freeman

Hi Gloria,

Thanks for the clarification on the fee policy. I hope that the amended request will make more efficient use of the research and retrieval personnel's time.

Could you please inform the Legal Advisor that this request is overdue. I'm aware I made changes to item 2, but item 1 can be exported as a CSV or KML in one click on Boulder PD's Flock Planning Center (https://planner.flocksafety.com/public/<uuid-here>).

Thanks,

William Freeman

Thanks for providing those documents, Gloria. Those satisfy my request, and I'll make payment soon.

William Freeman