What the request seeks
The request asks for the same type of Flock Safety event log or audit log previously produced, updated to cover June 1, 2026 through the date the agency performs its search.
Request text
Under the California Public Records Act, the request seeks an updated copy of the Flock Safety event log previously provided by the Amador County Sheriff’s Office.
It asks for the same type of event log or audit log previously produced, covering June 1, 2026 through the date the search for responsive records is performed.
The request asks for electronic production in the original CSV or spreadsheet format, with all available fields and columns included.
Agency response
August 24, 2026: County Counsel Greg Gillott wrote that one or more responsive records had been identified, but that certain records or portions were deemed exempt and would not be provided. The response cited Government Code §§ 7923.600, 7922.000, and 7927.705; Evidence Code § 1040; Civil Code § 1798.90.55(b); and California Constitution, article I, § 1.
The response states that the non-exempt records or portions were produced with the email.
Produced spreadsheet
Flock audit log — June through August 2026
The workbook contains 27 data rows with timestamps from June 3 through August 6, 2026. The archive preserves the workbook as received and uses a standardized public filename.
The August 12 request used the phrase “event log or audit log” because it sought an updated copy of the type of log previously produced. After reviewing the August 24 workbook, the archive now distinguishes these administrative audit entries from a search/activity event log. The produced workbook is titled “Flock Audit June to August 2026” and records administrative/configuration actions; it does not show search, hit, or user-lookup activity. This classification does not establish whether a separate event log exists or whether the agency understood the requested record type differently.
Clarification after the August 24 production
August 25, 2026: After reviewing the workbook, the requester explained that the intended record was the previously released report showing Flock license-plate detections/hits and related event information, rather than the administrative audit log.
August 26, 2026, 3:01 p.m.: County Counsel Greg Gillott replied that he would follow up with the Sheriff’s Office and asked for a copy of the previously received report so the correct record could be identified.
August 26, 2026, 9:07 p.m.: The requester clarified that the requested updates are the Total Vehicle Volume, Hotlist Total Alerts by Topic, and Hotlist Report by Source Type reports, and attached the earlier versions for reference.
As of this archive update, the August 24 audit workbook remains a produced record, but the clarified request for updated vehicle-volume and hotlist reports is still awaiting the Sheriff’s Office follow-up described by County Counsel.
Source correspondence
A readable PDF of the four-message exchange and a ZIP containing the four individual redacted EML derivatives are available below. The redacted EML package preserves message bodies and attachments while removing requester identifying/contact information and transport/authentication headers.
Withholding status
The response does not identify which specific rows, fields, records, or portions were withheld under each cited authority. The archive therefore records this as a partial production with stated withholdings, without inferring what omitted information contained.
Revision history
- Added the clarification exchange identifying Total Vehicle Volume, Hotlist Total Alerts by Topic, and Hotlist Report by Source Type as the reports actually sought; added redacted PDF/EML correspondence downloads and marked the clarification as pending.
- Added the August 24 agency response and produced XLSX; corrected the production classification to an audit log and linked the source-based audit-log analysis.
- Added the pending request to the public tracker.
- Request submitted.