| InterceptRadio.com Forums http://www.interceptradio.com/bbs/ |
|
| Talkgroup updates / official list - King County 800Mhz Sys. http://www.interceptradio.com/bbs/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=1038 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | andrecs [ Thu Apr 27, 2006 11:47 am ] |
| Post subject: | Talkgroup updates / official list - King County 800Mhz Sys. |
I noticed the list of talkgroups in the king county 800Mhz trunked system didn't seem like it had been updated for awhile, and noticed that we didn't have a solidly complete list (many ??? by talkgroup numbers)/ SO - I sent an email to David Mendel, who is listed now as the Radio Communications manager for King County, asking if I could get a complete list of all the talkgroups for the entire county, under the public records disclosure act. Took 10 days for the reply (at least they did reply) but he came back and said they were not going to grant my request for the talkgroup list, based on RCW 42.17.310 (1) (ww) saying that releasing the list would jeopardize public safety because terrorists could get ahold of it and could somehow render the system inoperative using this information, citing 09/11 as what caused this change, blah blah, and that is was exempt from public disclosure. I havn't responded yet but was a little surprised at this. Here's why: 1) all the transmitter site locations are public information (FCC and also right on King County's own site). Isn't that much more sensitive information for a terrorist to have then the talkgroup list? Same with the frequencies in use - you can get them easily! 2) We already know most of the important talkgroup #'s anyways - the ones we're missing are probably mundane ones like the 'Water meter guy' or something like that. So why be so anal with the list? 3) If they were really worried about us knowing the talkgroups - why don't they just scramble then all and start from scratch? 4) If someone actually sued, based on the above, would a judge really side with KC saying the talkgroups are that important? I am guessing the county would loose! The letter to myself was all offical and everything, even CC'ing a king county deputy prosecutor. I really didn't mean to put them to all the trouble, I just thought maybe they could email the list and it would be as simple as that. So, has anybody else had this same experience when trying to get information like this from government entities? Or has anyody gotten the "official" list lately? Just curious! I'm still trying to decide how I should respond to thier reply. -Andre.. |
|
| Author: | Vizwar [ Thu Apr 27, 2006 4:53 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
so you got a very formal "go away" back from them. i'd leave it be. |
|
| Author: | eriksdaddy [ Sat Apr 29, 2006 12:42 pm ] |
| Post subject: | reply from kc |
I contacted Lakewood Fire regarding what apparatus was at their stations. They quickly replied and included a list of what was at each station. About a day later though, Pierce County Sheriff calls and asks why I wanted the information. I was kind of like well I listen to a scanner and just wanted to know where the units where stationed when I hear them. It is not like I was asking for addresses and the complete layout of each station. The cop even asked if I was a terrorist. Nick |
|
| Author: | John Miles KE5FX [ Sat Apr 29, 2006 12:53 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
What an unfortunate attitude on the part of the public servant. There is literally no end to the lapses in governmental transparency and accountability that can be justified under the "but, but, but, teh turrorhists might get us" rubric. This is also the exact reply you can expect a few years from now when you write them to ask why they are encrypting all of the talkgroups. In the meantime, there are probably other ways to obtain the same information legally. I have mentioned the problem before. When I have time, I plan to set up an application to record 5-10 minutes of audio from every TG that's not in the known list. Not only will that eliminate a lot of the spurious entries that I'm sure I've captured, but it should also be possible to organize a "community" effort to identify the groups based on the content of the captured audio snippets. |
|
| Author: | andrecs [ Sat Apr 29, 2006 2:26 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Well thanks guys for your replies. John, I did see your post earlier but thought a new thread might be appropriate since your thread was mostly on your desktop rig and how it interpreted talkgroup numbers. I agree, this is most unfortunate for us in the scanning community. Radio scanning is a huge hobby nationwide that has been going on for decades. And I'm sure there's not one of us who would disagree 9/11 was a terrible thing and our nation (and especially our public safety officials) need to take steps to protect ourselves. But to target this (and us?) as what they need to protect themselves from? I'll agree a terrorist might be able to use radio scanning to assist them in thier means. But that's certainly not us. Nick, I can't even believe a Pierce county Sheriff called and asked you if you were a terrorist? What kind of a question is that? And you're probably right, in a few years they will probably be all encrypted. But there are issues with that - they would need much more expensive radios and for many thousands of subscribers that be very expensive indeed. Probably hard to squeeze that one in with no more than 1% increase in our property taxes every year. There are already a few SPD talkgroups that are digital and encrypted, for vice, narcotics, etc. Yeah, I probably should have sent my email to Wiz instead, maybe he would have been more sympathetic. I know he has posted on our board here before. Don't know why I didn't think of that. Guess I was thinking since it's a county wide system King County would be the lead agency in charge of it. Oh well, John your project sure sounds interesting! Let me know if you need any help! Thanks again everyone, --Andre... |
|
| Author: | andrecs [ Sat Apr 29, 2006 2:57 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Here's the actual letter if anyone is interested: ----------------------------------------------------- King County Information and Telecommunications Services Division 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2300 Seattle, WA 98104-5002 April 25, 2006 TO: Andre FM: Chris Richards, Business Operations Manager Information and Telecommunications Services RE: April 14, 2006 Email Dear Andre, David Mendel forwarded your Email dated April 14, 2006, seeking assistance in "making a public information request for a list of all the talkgroup ID numbers for the entire King County regional 800 Mhz trunked radio system." Please be advised that under Washington's Public Disclosure Act, King County ("County") is not required to assist you in drafting a public disclosure request. RCW 42.17.251. However, the County is required "to make available for public inspection and copying all public records, unless the record falls within a specific exemption of RCW 42.17.310." RCW 42.17.260 (1). Having said that, I also will inform you that, based on the County's understanding of your Email, the County cannot and will not provide this list to you in the event you do submit a proper public disclosure request. Pursuant to RCW 42.17.310 (1) (ww), the following is exempt from public inspection and copying: Those portions of records assembled, prepared, or maintained to prevent, mitigate, or respond to criminal terrorist acts, which are acts that significantly disrupt the conduct of government or of the general civilian population of the state or the United States and that manifest an extreme indifference to human life, the public disclosure of which would have a substantial likelihood of threatening public safety, consisting of: (i) Specific and unique vulnerability assessments or specific and unique response or deployment plans, including compiled underlying data collected in preparation of or essential to the assessments, or to the response or deployment plans; and (ii) Records not subject to public disclosure under federal law that are shared by federal or international agencies, and information prepared from national security briefings provided to state or local government officials related to domestic preparedness for acts of terrorism. RCW 42.17.310 (1) (ww). The above exemption applies to all the talkgroup ID numbers for the King County regional 800 Mhz trunked radio system because disclosure would jeopardize the integrity of the system and, most importantly, public safety. In addition, the release of all the talkgroup ID numbers for the King County regional 800 Mhz would allow an individual to monitor, intercept and or terminate communication among the talkgroups, thereby rendering the talkgroups useless. Finally, this applicable list is shared with federal agencies for many government purposes that includes domestic preparedness for terrorist acts. Thus, the County is unable to provide you with a current list should you submit a proper public disclosure request. This exemption was enacted and became law after the tragic events of September 11, 2001. The information you found on the internet was posted before 9/11 and removing this information is not within the County’s control. I am sure you will understand the reason for this and will be satisfied with my response. Thank you for your interest in matters related to the County’s regional 800 Mhz trunked radio system. Yours truly, Chris Richards Business Operations Manager King County Information and Telecommunications Services Division cc: David Mendel, Manager King County Radio Communications Services Anh Nguyen, Assistant Deputy Attorney King County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office |
|
| Author: | Wilrobnson [ Sat Apr 29, 2006 3:36 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: reply from kc |
eriksdaddy wrote: The cop even asked if I was a terrorist.
Nick It was obviously those flashlights in your truck that gave him that impression. In addition to obscuring your vision, they can be used as WMDs... :lol: |
|
| Author: | John Miles KE5FX [ Sat Apr 29, 2006 9:59 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Quote: The above exemption applies to all the talkgroup ID numbers for the King County regional 800 Mhz trunked radio system because disclosure would jeopardize the integrity of the system and, most importantly, public safety.
Wow. :roll: That's the most ridiculous thing I've read all day. Or at least, it was, until I read the part where he cc'ed the DA's office. That was nothing but a blatant and thoroughly-gratuitous attempt at intimidation. Hey, Mr. Richards. If you and your buddies in the prosecutor's office are putting citizens on a Terrorist Watch List for requesting information about publicly-accessible government infrastructure, it might be a good idea to put me on it too, just for future reference. That's "Miles" with an "M". |
|
| Author: | andrecs [ Sun Apr 30, 2006 7:09 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Yeah, I know. I was pretty surprised, especially at the DA thing too. I'm wondering if they needed to have the DA help them with properly qouting the RCW's, that would be my guess. You see, I think they are trying to make a strong case for them legally denying my request. Anyone could easily sue and test that. But, of course, to file a lawsuit against a government agency takes immense amounts of time and money. I've read RCW 42.17, and it is very clear on procedures. In fact, it says that any citizen can request the Attorney General to review any case where public disclosure was denied. So, the big question I am trying to chew over is, do I just let this go, or - do I sent them an polite but strong email back saying I disagree with thier interpretation of the RCW's and make a proper and formal public disclosure act request, then if they deny it ask the AG's office to review it. That would be some work but wouldn't cost me anything. Of course, I don't want to get strip searched next time I go to Sea-Tac, either. Wouldn't that be nice every time I go flying. So oh well, if anyone else has any ideas let me know! --Andre... |
|
| Author: | Deeply Shrouded [ Sun Apr 30, 2006 9:07 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Why not use a program like Trunker or something to capture the talkgroups, then by listening you can find out what they are, or see if you can contact someone in communications that has the info you require. I'm not exactly sure why such a thing would be illegal to have. FCC has the frequencies and you can find those online. I think what the jist of the letter is saying is, we can't and won't help you find out what you want to know, so you'll have to look for yourself. They're looking at it like this....they give you talkgroups, and the next day, an incident happens (insert here). Now, the agencies involved are investigated and it is found out that talkgroup info was willingly given out.... Well, you know where that one goes.... I'd try to contact the people that fix their radios and see what avenues are open there. Last resort is the Mayor and DA. --Deeply Shrouded & Quiet --KD7YVV, Kirkland, WA |
|
| Author: | Deeply Shrouded [ Sun Apr 30, 2006 9:23 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
http://www.kpho.com/Global/story.asp?S=4697315&nav=23Ku I would guess this is why.... Even though the info may be out there in the public domain Andre, look at it from the point of the agency. Out of the blue, they get a request for all their talkgroups from someone they don't know, have no information on, asking questions that POTENTIALLY COULD put their system as well as its users at risk. Not like you're going to go toppling towers or anything like that, but seriously, put yourself in their position, what would you do if you got an email (which can be spoofed, ip addresses can be changed, address could be a mailbox drop...etc etc etc...) You might get lucky and find someone who knows the info you seek and will give it to you, but through official channels, I think you've definately hit a dead end as well as focused a spotlight on you. --Deeply Shrouded & Quiet --KD7YVV, Kirkland, WA |
|
| Author: | andrecs [ Sun Apr 30, 2006 4:31 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Well, yes, like I said above, I totally agree that there are public safety issues at stake here with the radio system. I certainly hope they have as much security as they can built into the system. But - we're talking about the TALKGROUP ID'S here. Now, I'm not an RF engineer - but, I'm assuming that there isn't anything malicious someone can even do with the talkgroup ID numbers, correct? I mean, they can't be abused? It's just a number that comes through your radio? Perhaps that's what I'm not understanding here. Wouldn't the actual frequencies themselves or the tower locations be more sensitive information? And that information is publically given out by government agencies! I just don't understand that? I didn't think the talkgroups were that sensitive! And in my email, I clearly stated I was just an amatuer radio scanning enthusiast, with a Radio Shack scanner, and that was the reason for my request. I don't think it sounded threatening at all. In fact, I really thought it sounded quite like a reasonable request, given what a huge hobby scanning is across the United States. I certainly never imagined in a million years it would have drawn any sort of spotlight. I do appreciate everyone's comments, though. --Andre.. |
|
| Author: | Wilrobnson [ Sun Apr 30, 2006 5:21 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Odd...I did a number of open records requests awhile back, and only ran into one problem. I requested info and talkgroups for the state capitol TRS down in Olympia. I got a letter back from someone down there saying they were going to check with the attorney general's office and get back to me...Two days later I got a full list along with an 'apology' for the delay :wink: The only other issues I had were getting an unexpected $1.35 bill for photocopying from Benton County (they also have a TRS). It cost me more to buy and mail a money order than to get the info. I always used a form letter, found here http://www.splc.org/foiletter.asp |
|
| Author: | andrecs [ Sun Apr 30, 2006 5:46 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Cool website - thanks for that! Well good to know someone else had better luck, I guess.... |
|
| Author: | andrecs [ Sun Apr 30, 2006 5:48 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
By the way - how long ago was it that you got that info? Recently? Or pre-9/11? If other counties are giving out talkgroup info, that would certainly set a precedent in WA state, wouldn't it? Now you got me thinking again... |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC - 8 hours |
| Copyright © 2013 Interceptradio.com |
|