Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Surveillance Privacy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate panel advances bill limiting law-enforcement use of license-plate readers and setting penalties for misuse
Summary
A Senate committee advanced S447, which would restrict automatic license-plate reader (LPR) use to defined law-enforcement purposes, cap data retention at 90 days (unless part of an investigation), require written agency policies and visual confirmation before stops, and create misdemeanor penalties for misuse.
Miss Baker told the committee that S447 would limit law-enforcement use of automatic license-plate readers to specific purposes and require written policies before the systems are used. "The bill would establish the events for someone who knowingly requests, uses, obtains, or attempts to obtain captured license plate data of a law enforcement agency under false pretenses," she said, and on conviction the person "would be guilty of a misdemeanor, would be fined up to $1,000 and would be subject to imprisonment for not more than 2 years."
Supporters said the technology helps locate missing people and solve violent crimes. Senator Adams said the devices have helped in homicide investigations and called the systems an “important tool.” Deputy Kavanaugh and other law-enforcement witnesses told the panel how LPRs aided investigations.
Several members pressed for privacy protections and clarity about public access. Senator Ott asked whether the cameras—some mounted in highway rights of way—would be recording continuously and how long the data would be stored. Committee staff answered that the bill allows data retention up to 90 days and that footage saved for an ongoing investigation would be preserved under records laws. "This is for law enforcement use only," a committee supporter said, noting the proposal prohibits use for ticketing or speed enforcement.
Members also queried whether private cameras such as consumer doorbell devices would fall under the bill’s definition. The committee was told LPR systems are distinct because they generate searchable plate data rather than passively storing images.
On public-record access, members raised FOIA concerns: a senator described a scenario in which a neighbor could request hours of footage. Counsel and panelists said the bill currently includes no express exemptions to public-record law and that criminal penalties would target anyone who requested data under false pretenses and misused it. Several members asked staff to tighten language to prevent abusive requests under the Freedom of Information Act.
After extended questioning, members agreed to move the bill forward and to continue drafting changes on retention, access and data-security issues. The subcommittee gave S447 a favorable report.
