The AVL data should have been published long ago. Of course it is of interest to the public. SPD's stated reason for resisting release of the data to me after I jumped through the necessary hoops keeps changing. Regardless, in delaying access to these public records, they violated the law.

We shouldn't have to go begging for access to our public records--particularly records about the activities of public employees who carry guns on the job, rarely face consequences for their actions, and work for a department that was found to regularly engage in constitutio…--one in which no employee has ever been held accountable for those actions.

Seattle Police Department continue to conspire to keep the public in the dark about policing in our city. They resist accountability at every opportunity. They regularly flout the Public Records Act, claiming they just have too much work to keep up with, but assign only a dozen of their employees to the group who do that work. We don't even know what most of them do: I heard Tim Burgess, president of Seattle City Council, tell a crowd of people at a May, 2014 budget workshop that the council are able to determine the assigned duties of only 400 of SPD's more than 1300 staff.

The entire history of my July 10, 2013, reco… is published on MuckRock (a service I use extensively). Also available are the COP's and my complaint and the settlement agreement.

It was a simple request, for the "full and complete database of automatic vehicle location (AVL) data in its native electronic format, with related metadata, including database schema." SPD needlessly and unlawfully delayed processing of the request, then closed it without any lawful justification.

A week after I filed the request, facing the deadline for action required by the Public Records Act, they claimed that they would need about seven more weeks to "research this request, collect responsive records, and/or prepare records for dissemination."

Seven weeks later, without explanation, they estimated it would take another four weeks.

Four weeks after that, in late September, they claimed that "[they do] not maintain a database of AVL data" and that they "would have to undertake extensive customized programming of text files in order to create such a database," estimating the cost of this programming to be $2580.00 (40 hours at $64.50 per hour). I responded, "Although I appreciate your offer to convert the records into database form, that won't be necessary, as the intent of my request is to simply obtain the records in their native electronic format. In your e-mail, you stated that SPD `would have to undertake extensive customized programming of text files,' which I take as confirmation that SPD possesses the responsive records already in electronic format. Please provide them to me as they are without making any unnecessary conversions."

A few days later, they repeated their claim that extensive programming was necessary, said that they planned to do so but had no timeline for such, and closed my request, effectively denying me and the rest of the public access to this public information about the public activities of our public employees.

Only after they were sued did SPD adopt the position that redaction of the data (which includes, bizarrely, hiding information about use of their cars while policing sporting events) is required. Ansel's quote from the City Attorney's office is the first I've heard of SPD's $45,000 estimate for the cost of providing access to their records as required by the PRA. I've no idea how they got there from their September estimate of about $2580.

It's a good thing SPD settled. One judge ordered SPD to pay $45/day, see http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/se… "The court specifically found that SPD did not act in bad faith, but nevertheless found a basis for imposing a $45 per diem penalty "to tell agencies other than Seattle Police Department and to tell the public that they can trust that the agencies will recognize this important duty to administer the public disclosure laws in good faith.""

Given that the raw data is in human readable text files SPD had no basis for denying the request. Even though the requester asked for it in SQL format the format issue is separate from the actual request. The law does not require agencies to automate redaction but they still have to redact when required. The base level response required is in this case would be to review the data in batches and redact it by hand. Sure a lot cheaper in the long run to redact it automatically.

@2: I, the requester to whom you referred, did not request it in SQL format, or in any specific format. Rather, I requested (as noted in @1), the "full and complete database of automatic vehicle location (AVL) data in its native electronic format, with related metadata, including database schema."

As for redaction "by hand" or automatically: This is digital information. There are no hands involved.

I also requested AVL data from 22 other agencies in Washington.

Washington State Patrol staff sought and received a temporary restraining order against the state to prevent releasing their AVL data. Their primary concern was reportedly that WSP staff take their cars home at night, so the data would likely reveal the locations of their residences. A spot-check suggested that a large portion of those deputes in are in the voter registration database, and so their addresses are already public, but I dropped my request rather than fighting that fight.

@3 So sorry for my mistake I misremembered your request. Wow that I reread it what a screw up. I think structured text files fits broad definition of database http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionar…

As for hands I mean manual review/redaction

I understand the concern over officer's homes..... but why the rest of this stuff, particularly where the cars get parked at Centurylink and the Seattle Center ?

mutually-agreed-upon redactions—including the addresses of officers with take-home cars, stakeout/SWAT and "help the officer" vehicle trips, and the locations of cars during events at CenturyLink stadium and Seattle Center

I'd think that there could be a legitimate concern over the potential for misuse, as in gangs finding "snitches" by seeing if police cars have visited certain addresses, but what's the deal with hiding cars at sporting events? That'd actually be the thing that a lot of people would probably want to know...how much of our limited police resources are being used for sports events?

@6: Good question. I didn't pick that battle. Maybe someone else will.

In a July 16, 2015, e-mail from Mary Perry at the City Attorney's office to our attorney, Ms. Perry wrote:

“Help the Officer (Emergency)”

Please note that we do not oppose disclosing the general “Help the Officer” call type. The specific concern is with “Help the Officer (Emergency)” call type. “Help the Officer (Emergency)” is used for those events where officers may be exposed to substantial risk and immediate help is needed. We have reviewed the historical data and this call type has been applied to fewer than 200 of 2.7 million events. This represents .007% (7 thousandths of a percent). Similar to the special events categories, these are the type of low frequency but high risk events that warrant redaction. We cannot agree to the release of the AVL data related to this call type.

GPS data for "help the officer" calls would be particularly interesting, because there is a high potential for dangerous driving during those incidents, and traffic accidents are the leading cause of on-duty deaths of police officers. But SPD are going to fight hard to hide those records of their actions from the public.

As a taxpayer, up until a couple years ago I probably would have cringed at how much this was costing the city and questioned the necessity of efforts like COP's.

But I've spent the last 10 months trying to get the SPD to address an ongoing problem with its West Precinct officers. Most complaints have gone without acknowledgement or response. I finally filed my first complaint about the problem last December 15. On September 30 I received my first and only response to it, from Brenda Gilmore, Senior Executive Assistant in Chief O'Toole's office - and all she did was inform me that after 9 1/2 months they closed it.

Repeated attempts to contact West Precinct Captain Chris Fowler has all been ignored. According to the OPA, his failure to respond to my complaints about his officers breaking the law is a customer service matter and thus out of the OPA's scope.

So to COP, more power to you. Please continue to hold the SPD accountable. They're supposed to be working for us after all.

And maybe someday Chief O'Toole's pledge to restore accountability, trust and transparency will become something more than the empty press conference rhetoric that it is today.

@10: As Ansel wrote in his post, I would prefer that SPD just abide by the law in the first place. But when they violate the Public Records Act, the only enforcement mechanism is lawsuit. If we, the people, did not sue agencies who violate this law, they would be encouraged to continue violating it.

At least in Center for Open Policing's case, the money the offender ended up paying will go to a good cause--more government transparency work. When we settled a PRA lawsuit with Washington State Patrol last year, the first thing we did after receiving their check was make a down-payment Seattle Police Department for the fees for copying all of their internal investigation files.