Public records requests

City tracking 238-2025 · broad Flock request

Filed about October 16, 2025. Public Request: MuckRock Flock Request. The request sought Flock-related communications, contracts, procurement documents, hot-list names, agencies shared with or from, private-site agreements, and right-of-way installation permits.

The City issued a fee estimate of $81.87 (October 2025). After payment, document access was provided in November 2025. Records released under this request and held in this archive include:

• Resolution packets as produced: RES-0022-2023 and RES-0087-2025
• 2024-162 Flock OS 911 PDF
• ROW permit PDF (52399)
• Flock Safety correspondence PDF
• Exchange mailbox exports (Outlook .pst files). Not published on this site.

Resolutions for 2023 and October 2025 also appear in the City’s public council document systems and on this site’s Library page.

From the mailbox extract

The release included multi-GB Exchange mailbox exports (MuckRock 238-2025 / 194981). The extract is not published here.

Pilot metrics intent (February 2023)

On February 6, 2023, early in the public pilot, Sgt. Brandon Claxton emailed patrol, detectives, and dispatch lists that the cameras were a pilot to be evaluated after a couple of months using officer feedback and analytics from Flock, prepared for Command Staff. He asked officers to email him when Flock solved a case or produced leads, and to mark in-product Apprehended or Not Apprehended so administrators could pull benefit reports.

Under 211-2026, evaluation and many outcome categories still returned No Preexisting documents.

Records retention discussion (March–April 2023)

Before the multi-year services contract, city mail under subject Flock Safety Contract and Records Retention opened the retention question. Deputy City Clerk / Records Manager Julia Porter cited schedule POL 011 and 30-day retention for police audio/video, recommended adding video disposition to monthly Council disposition lists, and asked to meet on process. Holly Grant (Records Unit / Custodian) wrote that Records does not handle audio/video retention but would attend so the unit could answer questions. Chief Bob Muenz named Capt. Rapp (and possibly Sgt. Claxton) as contacts and said scope was expected to include Flock plus facility/body/vehicle video. Fixed-network policy topics later referred to the portal under 211-2026.

Early sites vs multi-year scale

Mailbox planning files include a camera-location CSV for Blue Springs MO PD listing 24 named sites (intersection labels in planning materials). Local coverage in early 2023 also described a roughly two-dozen camera pilot. Post-pilot commercial quotes and Resolution 22-2023 order-form language run to about 51 Falcon-class units plus Flex gear and about $148,350 per year. Later portal and expansion figures are higher; counts from different dates are not interchangeable.

Library: Resolution 22-2023 · 2023 post-pilot quote · ROW permit 52399.

Success tracking brief (February 2024)

Among city email produced under this request is a vendor “Account Review” with the Police Department’s Flock liaison. The calendar agenda listed long-term goals, usage and adoption stats, and discuss success tracking. The follow-up message attached a Flock slide deck labeled for Blue Springs MO PD (title page dated February 20, 2024).

One slide in that deck describes an in-product outcome log and a CSV download of user-entered results, to show council and the community return on the Flock partnership. Fields listed include case number, number of arrests, disposition, crimes, property recovered, approximate value, and notes.

Vendor mail describing product features is not a city-held evaluation package. Full deck: Account Review PDF (Library).

FlockOS 911 competitive bid waiver (September 2024)

The same production includes a City of Blue Springs Request for Competitive Bid Waiver for supplier Flock Group Inc.. The form is signed and finance-cleared September 25, 2024. City mail under subject FlockOS 911 AIF attaches that form with Flock’s sole-source letter and related contracting files.

On the form, checked reasons include items sold through the manufacturer only with “no other comparable unit available,” and “Other reason; sole source letter attached.” The written explanation is: “FlockOS 911 is a sole source product from Flock Group Inc.” For how the price was shown to be fair, the form checks Other and answers “See above.”

Library: bid-waiver form · Flock sole-source letter · related release 2024-162 Flock OS 911 packet.

Share surface (network notices)

The mailbox includes a large set of automated vendor notices that other agencies have shared Flock cameras with Blue Springs (about 100 unique agency names in the extract, many of them Missouri agencies). Names in the release include Raymore, Gladstone, and county sheriffs’ offices, plus out-of-state agencies. Separate digests list pending share requests aiming at Blue Springs cameras with proposed Search and Hot List permissions that a local admin must accept or reject. In August 2025, vendor staff sent an education message on sharing, search, and audits (opt-in models and radius sharing examples). Share notices and product education are not Organization or Network audit exports; see 166-2026 and 323-2026.

Library: LEA · Free Form · 2023 quote · 2025 quote · DFR impact prep. Related Council path: Resolution 108-2025.

City tracking 166-2026 · Organization and Network audits

Filed about June 2, 2026. Public Request: MuckRock ALPR audit. The request sought Flock Insights Organization Audit and Network Audit data from January 1, 2025, forward (machine-readable if available), plus network-share settings.

On June 4, 2026, Custodian of Police Records Holly Grant closed the request with no fee. The letter states that the Police Department does not have any records responsive regarding Flock Safety; that Flock’s subscription is responsible for collection, storage, maintenance, and retention; that information that may be responsive can be accessed through the Flock transparency portal; and that records older than 30 days will not be available under Flock’s stated deletion policy. Share-relationship notices under 238-2025 are not the audit exports requested here.

Press: Chief Muenz on bi-weekly audits and EO 26-18 (Coverage). Captain Rapp’s September 16 close is under 323-2026. City-held findings from those reviews, and the search logs that order describes, are not among the records released under this request.

City tracking 211-2026 · evaluation, outcomes, and policies

Three online Public Records Request forms (about July 9–10, 2026) were acknowledged together under tracking number 211-2026 and routed to Police Administration. Substantive answer from Custodian of Police Records Holly Grant, August 4, 2026. Closed with no fee assessed. Category tables below summarize that City answer. Empty categories use the City’s wording: No Preexisting documents.

Materials presented to or relied on by Council (2025 and later)

Performance and use (2023 to present)

Policies and governance

City tracking 248-2026 · expansion emails (open)

Filed August 4, 2026 (separate online form from the 211-2026 set). Seeks emails and related records discussing a recommendation to expand the Flock agreement during 2025, including Resolution 87-2025 (October expansion) and Resolution 108-2025 (December Safe City path).

On August 6, 2026 the City Clerk issued a fee estimate of $109.47. The letter’s original IT keyword set was brand-name searches for Flock Safety. It invited confirmation or alternatives and described a production target around August 21, 2026 if payment arrived promptly.

Later that day the requester replied before payment: keep the purpose but sharpen keywords to Safe City, the 2025 resolution identifiers, Freeform, DFR, RTCC, and Flock paired with expansion or approval language, so hits favor decision mail over every vendor brand mention. A revised fee estimate and timeline were requested.

On August 7, 2026 the Clerk accepted those search terms, said IT estimated staff time cut in half, and issued a revised fee of $54.74. The August 21 close-of-business target stayed the same. As of September 2026, this archive has no payment confirmation or released packet.

Council agendas, minutes, resolutions, and ordinances remain available in the City’s document systems. Mirrored copies (Google Drive): Library. Live hubs: eCode360 Blue Springs and Agenda Center.

City tracking 323-2026 · audit exports and contracts

Filed September 14, 2026, by Kansas City DSA. Public request: MuckRock ALPR audit. It is a clone of multi-request 184047. The request repeated the Organization Audit and Network Audit exports (from January 1, 2025) and the network-share settings, and added Flock purchase and installation contracts.

On September 16, 2026, Captain Don Rapp answered. For the share settings and contracts he attached the City’s Flock contract (Resolution 108-2025) and pointed to the Flock transparency portal. He wrote that there are no individual data-sharing agreements between agencies, and that data sharing is elective and determined by each agency using the system. For the two audit exports he wrote that Missouri law does not require a governmental body to create a new record, cited Weeks v. St. Louis County and Jones v. Jackson County Circuit Court, and stated that answering those items would create a new record. The close letter does not state a fee.

Flock transparency portal (where City answers pointed)

Under tracking number 211-2026, several policy topics were answered by linking a site run by Flock Safety. The close letters under 166-2026 and 323-2026 also pointed to that portal. Live page: transparency.flocksafety.com/blue-springs-mo-pd. Numbers below are from a browser capture of that page on September 22, 2026 (rolling 30-day windows).

PD menu “Flock Safety” opens the same portal: www.bluespringsgov.com/2704/Flock-Safety. Cost check of Success Stories: Outcomes. Retention and Carpenter/Chatrie: Location privacy.

Location privacy (Carpenter & Chatrie)

Carpenter and Chatrie are phone-location holdings. They do not decide ALPR rules.

In Carpenter v. United States (2018), the Supreme Court held that obtaining seven or more days of historical cell-site location information from a phone company is generally a Fourth Amendment search requiring a warrant. People have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the record of their physical movements. The Court did not decide that shorter windows are automatically exempt.

In Chatrie v. United States (June 29, 2026), the Court held that police conduct a Fourth Amendment search when they acquire a person’s Google Location History (including through a geofence warrant). It rejected the idea that a short time window automatically escapes that rule, and remanded on whether that warrant met probable cause and particularity.

Those holdings concern phone location records held by carriers or tech companies. Plate or vehicle hits plus time and place across a network can still assemble a retrospective movement map. How long a vendor stores data is a policy choice; the cases focus on when government access to a detailed movement record is a search.

In August 2026, Flock announced a recommended default retention of seven days (down from 30), with longer hold via Evidence Mode / case numbers, and said existing customers keep their current periods. The Blue Springs city-referred portal still listed 30-day retention on the September 22, 2026 capture.

Opinions (PDF): Carpenter · Chatrie. Flock announcement: company blog. Press write-up: Press · Location privacy.

Blue Springs Police Department Policies

Public order 41.3 / §41.3.9 covers readers in department vehicles, not a named fixed Flock/Safe City network SOP. Under 211-2026, fixed-network policy questions were answered with the Flock portal URL. That answer did not include a separate city SOP packet for those topics.

Portal Success Stories and RTCC text are not multi-year evaluations. Compliance and oversight categories: 211-2026.