Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety Tech topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public raises privacy concerns over automated license-plate readers; cites recent Norfolk court ruling
Summary
A speaker urged the council to consider privacy and constitutional issues with the proposed deployment of Flock automated license-plate readers, citing a May 10, 2024 Virginia court decision requiring warrants for prolonged tracking.
A member of the public raised privacy concerns about the city’s planned or existing use of automated license-plate readers (ALPRs) and urged the council to consider legal limits and the potential for abuse.
Mike Neal told the council he had previously sent court documents and then summarized a Virginia case filed May 10, 2024—identified in his remarks as City of Norfolk v. Jeffon Antonio Bell—where the court considered whether use of the ALPR system called Flock required a warrant for prolonged location tracking. Neal quoted from the trial judge’s analysis, saying the opinion emphasized citizens’ reasonable expectation of privacy in their movements and warned that prolonged, continuous tracking could require a warrant.
Neal said Norfolk had 172 license-plate cameras and that those systems were accessible across agencies; he said officers in the Norfolk case testified they did not obtain a warrant before accessing plates in the Flock system. Neal urged the council to read the case and weigh constitutional protections against investigative benefits, saying “catching criminals a little bit easier is not worth the price.”
Council members acknowledged receipt of the court filing and said they would follow the case. The council did not take any formal action, but the public comment drew attention to potential legal constraints and privacy risks for city use of ALPR technology.
