Records that were produced
- Extensive emails, meetings, mapping calls, pricing and proposals from Flock Safety.
- A Flock-authored sole-source justification.
- Historical purchase orders and claims for Vigilant Solutions.
- An October 2023 Vigilant LEARN subscription-renewal quote.
What those records establish
ACSO had experience with a Vigilant investigative-data subscription while separately pursuing Flock. Flock actively supported sales, deployment planning and procurement. Those facts do not demonstrate that ACSO compared two camera vendors or conducted “extensive” competitive research.
Core records not found in the production
Competing vendor records
No competing ALPR-camera proposal, demo correspondence, quote or vendor email chain.
Evaluation framework
No written requirements, criteria, scoring, comparison chart or procurement matrix.
Risk analysis
No independent privacy, civil-liberties, accuracy, reliability, retention or sharing comparison.
Decision record
No ACSO-authored recommendation or explanation of why Flock was chosen over an alternative.
Assessment of request items 28–36
Items 29, 30 and 35 were assessed as unanswered. Items 28, 31, 33, 34 and 36 were only partially answered. Item 32—communications with non-Flock vendors—was materially incomplete because no actual contemporaneous non-Flock vendor communication thread was produced.
Targeted records needed
- Identify every vendor or product considered, including the “second company” previously referenced.
- Produce communications, quotes, demos, notes and attachments for each.
- Produce the agency’s evaluation criteria, comparison, recommendation and decision record.
- Search the Sheriff, command staff, GSA/purchasing, County Administration, County Counsel and IT custodians.
- If no comparative research was documented, state that directly and describe the search performed.