Woodside accepts quarterly ALPR audit, directs staff to evaluate camera for Runnymede neighborhood

Woodside — The Woodside Town Council voted unanimously Sept. 20 to accept the San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office quarterly audit of the town’s automated license-plate reader (ALPR) program and directed staff to evaluate adding an ALPR camera at Runnymede and Raymundo in response to neighborhood crime concerns.

Town Manager Jason Ledbetter introduced the report and turned the presentation to the sheriff’s office representative, identified in the meeting as the department’s administrative sergeant. The sheriff’s office presented an audit of 10 randomly selected searches and reported those samples complied with the Town of Woodside’s ALPR policy.

Council members pressed the sheriff’s office and staff for more detail about how compliance is determined, what data are retained, and how long records remain available. Council member Wall asked whether the ALPR location map (Attachment A to the town policy) had been updated; Ledbetter said it had been brought up to date and posted. Wall also pressed the town manager to follow up on the annual review of the vendor Flock’s security practices, which the town manager said is performed during the annual report process.

The sheriff’s office representative told council members that the audit samples included required fields such as user name, reason for search and time frame, and that searches tied to active criminal investigations (the example cited was a search tied to California Vehicle Code 10851 — stolen vehicle) are retained as investigative evidence. The sergeant said non-investigative ALPR reads are purged after 60 days and confirmed that Flock stores the raw captures; investigators may download and retain data that are associated with an active investigation.

Council members asked about interagency sharing and whether outside agencies could access Woodside data directly. The sheriff’s office representative said that some neighboring agencies (San Mateo PD, Redwood City PD) have been configured to access the Woodside system under existing arrangements, and that prior to broader sharing the sheriff’s office is required by town policy to ensure outside agencies will comply with Woodside’s restrictions.

Public comment included a statement from Mike Katz-Lubke, director of research at Oakland Privacy, who urged the council to require more robust auditing and to publish counts of total searches rather than a 10-sample review. Katz-Lubke also reiterated concerns raised in recent statewide reporting about possible improper sharing of ALPR data with federal agencies.

After deliberation, the council voted 5–0 to accept the quarterly ALPR report and to direct staff to return with the steps necessary to evaluate siting an ALPR camera at Runnymede and Raymundo, a location council members described as an underprotected neighborhood facing recurring crimes. Council members said they supported continuing audits and improving transparency about search reasons in future reports.

The council’s action was an acceptance of the quarterly audit and an instruction to staff to examine the additional camera request; council members and staff emphasized the distinction between accepting the sheriff’s audit (a compliance report) and separate policy decisions about camera siting or changes to retention and sharing rules.

Votes at a glance: The motion to accept the quarterly ALPR report and direct staff on a Runnymede camera passed unanimously: Council member Abarish — yes; Council member Brown — yes; Council member Gold — yes; Council member Wall — yes; Mayor Domkowski — yes.

Looking ahead: Council members asked the town manager to ensure the annual vendor security review is scheduled and to consider enhancements to the quarterly report that would map search reasons more explicitly to statutory or case references and provide counts of total searches during each reporting period.