Supported by the record.
Responsive records or other reliable sources establish the point directly.
RESEARCH & FOIA
Unknown is not the end of the story.
When public records establish only part of a surveillance system, the remaining questions stay visible until additional evidence resolves them.
PUBLIC INVESTIGATION LOG
Show the work, not just the conclusion.
This docket records open questions, public-records requests, responses, and findings without promoting inference into fact.
Public-records requests are used to obtain policies, contracts, logs, retention schedules, technical documents, training material, procurement records, and other evidence that may not appear on an agency website.
HOW THIS PAGE WORKS
The evidence stops here.
A plausible inference is not enough. We state the limit instead of filling it with guesswork.
There is a specific way to find out.
The question is tied to identifiable records or agencies rather than indefinite speculation.
ACTIVE DOCKET
Current investigations
IL-SOS-FR-001 UNDER INVESTIGATION
Illinois Secretary of State facial-recognition system
Illinois law establishes that the Secretary of State maintains credential photographs and expressly addresses facial-recognition search services. Operational details remain unclear from the statutes and public-facing material reviewed so far.
Current findings
- 625 ILCS 5/6-110.1 requires the Secretary of State to maintain captured photographs and sets confidentiality and disclosure rules.
- 625 ILCS 5/6-110.1 and 15 ILCS 335/11 expressly refer to facial-recognition search services.
- 92 Ill. Adm. Code 1030.140 governs use and disclosure of captured images for specified recipients and investigations.
- The credential population is not limited to adults; Illinois states there is no minimum age for a state ID card.
Unresolved questions
- How long are historical driver’s-license, permit, and state-ID photographs retained?
- Are facial templates, embeddings, feature vectors, or other derived biometric records stored separately from the source photographs?
- Which agencies may request facial-recognition searches in practice?
- How many searches have been performed, by year and requesting agency?
- What legal or policy predicate is required for a search?
- What audit logs, access logs, or approval records exist?
- What vendor, software, infrastructure, or cloud systems support the service?
- How are images prepared, submitted, compared, returned, retained, and deleted?
- What notice, if any, is given to Illinois residents during credential issuance?
Relevant records
- Policies, SOPs, directives, manuals, training material, and memoranda governing facial-recognition searches or captured-image searches.
- Retention schedules and destruction policies for current and historical credential photographs and any derived biometric data.
- Vendor contracts, statements of work, licenses, subscriptions, purchase orders, invoices, renewals, and system documentation.
- Data dictionaries, system architecture descriptions, field definitions, database documentation, and records describing templates or embeddings.
- Aggregate search counts by year, requesting agency, purpose, and disposition where maintained.
- Logs or audit records identifying requesting agencies, request dates, approvals, and search activity, subject to lawful redaction.
- Policies governing image export, secondary dissemination, recipient retention, and deletion.
- Public-facing or internal notice language concerning facial-recognition-related use of credential photographs.
IL-SOS-FR-002 UNDER INVESTIGATION
DMV / credentialing notice and public disclosure
The founder does not recall being told during the credentialing process that Secretary of State photographs are subject to statutory facial-recognition provisions. That personal experience is not enough to establish statewide notice practices.
Unresolved questions
- What written, posted, digital, verbal, or form-based notice is provided before or during photograph capture?
- Do DMV facilities display any notice specifically mentioning facial recognition?
- Do application forms, privacy statements, receipts, appointment portals, or employee scripts disclose secondary use for facial-recognition searches?
- Has notice language changed over time?
Relevant records
- Current and historical privacy notices used at Driver Services facilities.
- Application forms, photo-capture notices, kiosk text, signage, handouts, web notices, and employee scripts.
- Policies requiring or describing disclosure to applicants about image storage, sharing, or facial-recognition use.
- Records showing revisions to notice language and the dates those revisions took effect.
IL-SURV-MAP-001 UNDER INVESTIGATION
Local surveillance infrastructure inventory
NoRec has begun a documented local surveillance inventory using FOIA records and field observations. Existing records establish Boone County ALPR policy details and a City of Belvidere Flock location list; ownership and operational details for additional mapped devices remain unresolved.
Unresolved questions
- Which surveillance technologies are currently deployed or contracted?
- How many devices or endpoints exist?
- Where are they located when location can lawfully be disclosed?
- What vendors and contracts support them?
- What data-sharing networks are enabled?
- What retention, export, and audit rules apply?
Relevant records
- Current contracts, invoices, purchase orders, grants, subscriptions, and renewals for surveillance technologies.
- Inventories, asset lists, deployment counts, and system descriptions.
- Policies governing access, retention, exports, hotlists, sharing, and auditing.
- Data-sharing agreements, memoranda of understanding, and network-participation agreements.
- Training materials and administrator documentation.
LOCAL RESEARCH · BOONE COUNTY / BELVIDERE
Findings established through local records.
The Boone County / Belvidere surveillance file contains the full local record. Key findings are summarized here because they originated as open research questions.
30-day Flock-hosted retention
Boone County Sheriff's Office Policy 450 states that data hosted by Flock is purged after 30 days.
County exports can persist longer
The same policy says ALPR data downloaded to the county server should be stored no longer than one year, subject to evidence and records-retention requirements.
Vehicle attributes go beyond the plate
The policy describes detections containing the plate together with vehicle make, model, color, and unique identifiers — part of what NoRec describes as vehicle/property fingerprinting.
Annual browsing audits
Policy 450 directs the Sheriff or designee to audit ALPR detection-browsing inquiries at least once per calendar year, including a random sample.
Belvidere location record
The supplied City of Belvidere FOIA response lists seven Flock locations: six shown as installed and one shown as planning.
Sharing, users, and audit results
The published source set does not establish the complete current sharing list, number of authorized users, or the findings of the required annual audits.
FOIA PRINCIPLES
Request the records that define the system.
Request records, not explanations.
Public-records laws generally work best when the request identifies existing records: contracts, policies, logs, invoices, reports, emails, data dictionaries, retention schedules, or training material.
Separate capability from use.
A manual saying a product can perform a search does not prove an agency performed that search. A contract for a feature does not prove it was enabled. Capability and documented use remain separate questions.
Ask for aggregate data when individual records are sensitive.
Search counts, requesting-agency totals, retention periods, policy changes, and contract values can reveal scale without publishing personal investigative information.
Expect exemptions and partial responses.
A redaction is not automatically evidence of misconduct. The useful question is what exemption was asserted, whether it fits the withheld material, and whether a narrower request or appeal can resolve the issue.
Preserve the response.
The request, correspondence, responsive files, metadata, dates, and agency explanation all become part of the evidentiary record.
Publish corrections.
If a response disproves a working theory, the page should change. The purpose of a records request is to learn what happened, not to manufacture confirmation.
REQUEST ANATOMY
Elements of a strong records request
- Agency and subject: identify the system, vendor, program, or policy with enough precision to route the request.
- Date range: define a meaningful period where possible instead of asking for an unlimited historical search.
- Record categories: policies, contracts, invoices, logs, training, data dictionaries, correspondence, audit material, or aggregate statistics.
- Format request: ask for native electronic records where practical, including spreadsheets in machine-readable form.
- Segregability: request release of non-exempt portions when some information must be withheld.
- Clarification preference: invite the agency to contact the requester before denying an ambiguous request that could be narrowed.
CONTRIBUTE
Have a record or a lead?
Primary records can go straight into GitHub. Leads, local observations, and discussion can go to the Telegram group.
