Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Surveillance And Privacy topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Resident urges Shelton to review automated license-plate readers, cites state law SB60002 and privacy concerns

Shelton City Council · April 8, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

A resident raised privacy concerns about fixed and mobile automated license-plate readers, referenced SB60002 and potential camera placement near schools and places of worship, and urged the city not to renew related contracts and to disable mobile readers if used.

On Zoom, Matthew Hilton told Shelton’s council he was concerned about automated license-plate readers (ALPRs) installed by private companies such as Flock, Motorola and Axon. He referenced recently passed SB60002 and said the law restricts ALPR placement in sensitive locations; he said two local cameras may be adjacent to Shelton High School and St. Edward’s Catholic Church and asked the council to investigate whether those installations comply with the statute.

Hilton also asked whether Shelton Police use mobile ALPRs — trailer-mounted units or vehicle-mounted systems — and urged the city to disable mobile readers if they are operating because, he said, mobile systems can collect data while passing sensitive sites. He warned that private companies ultimately control collected data and alleged that ALPR data has been shared with federal immigration authorities in other jurisdictions.

Council response and context: the comment was made during the public-comment period; council did not take immediate action at the meeting but the concern was placed on the record. Council members and staff did not state a departmental policy at this meeting; staff follow-up would be required to confirm whether police operate mobile ALPRs and whether any camera locations are inconsistent with SB60002.

From the record: Hilton named SB60002 and company names and described locations he believed may be in violation; those allegations were marked for staff follow-up rather than resolved during the April 7 meeting.

Next steps: staff should confirm existing ALPR locations and uses, verify compliance with SB60002 or other legal constraints, and report back to the council before contract renewal decisions.