Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Surveillance And Privacy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents press council for transparency on license‑plate readers; council moves $24,000 into draft budget for policy review
Summary
During public comment, residents urged the Auburn City Council to halt or subject automatic license‑plate readers to public review and a use policy; the council voted to move $24,000 for the program onto the FY27 draft budget so the full policy and operational questions can be discussed at a later workshop.
AUBURN — Several residents told the Auburn City Council on March 2 they were unaware their movements had been subject to license‑plate reading cameras and urged the council to delay funding until public hearings, a clear use policy and transparency about data sharing were in place.
State Representative and Auburn resident Laurel Libby told the council the cameras installed by the police department have logged large volumes of vehicle data and described the installation as “mass surveillance.” She asked the council not to simply fold the camera operation’s cost into the FY27 budget: “If Auburn is going to operate a mass surveillance system, then that decision should be made in the open with complete transparency and accountability,” she said.
What council did: after a focused discussion about procedure and policy, councilors voted by show of hands to move the $24,000 automatic license‑plate‑reader (ALPR) line onto the draft FY27 budget so the item will receive a substantive policy review and direct public comment at a later workshop. Moving the item onto the budget does not authorize expenditure; it schedules the program for fuller review during the budget process.
Positions on the council: Councilor Rachel Randall said she would not consider funding the system; “I won’t even consider funding this,” she said during the workshop. Other council members said they wanted a full, public, evidence‑based discussion before making a final funding decision. Councilor Tim Cowan supported moving the item for public review so the council can hear detailed operational and privacy information and receive public testimony.
Public input and technical comments: David Stro, who described himself as the owner of deflock.com, said he submitted a technical critique by email and urged the council to review it. Multiple speakers in public comment requested answers about where camera data goes, retention policies, sharing with third parties and whether federal grant funding changed the timing or public‑notice requirements for the initial installation.
Next steps: staff said the $24,000 figure will be part of the FY27 draft budget materials; the council signaled it intends to hold a fuller policy discussion, invite public comment, and seek technical briefings from the police department before any final appropriation.
Funding note: the manager and staff said the ALPR program has a history and a mix of grant and local funding; councilors emphasized that moving the item into the budget allows a public forum for review rather than a final decision on purchase or permanent operations.
