Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Privacy Surveillance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City attorney warns of legal risk to banning private license‑plate readers; public urges stronger action
Summary
After a large public turnout urging a ban on private automated license‑plate readers (ALPRs), Albany’s city attorney told council a broad ban on private property would likely face state‑preemption, constitutional and takings challenges; council asked staff to explore a signage requirement and report back.
Scores of residents urged the Albany City Council on July 8 to restrict or ban private use of automated license‑plate‑reader cameras (ALPRs) after the city terminated its contract with a vendor earlier this year. Public commenters said the cameras threaten privacy and disproportionately harm vulnerable communities.
City Attorney Sean Kidds briefed the council on the legal landscape. He said state law already sets parameters for law‑enforcement ALPR use (including data‑retention and logging requirements) and that the state’s preemption of some aspects of ALPR use would make it difficult for the city to bar law enforcement from using the technology within city limits. Kidds warned a city ordinance that banned private ALPRs on private property could face multiple legal challenges — equal protection or free‑speech claims, Fifth Amendment takings claims if a business had invested in equipment, and other due‑process challenges — and might require the city to defend costly litigation.
Kidds also said enforcement would be difficult because there is no registry of private ALPR installations and noted the city’s insurer advised caution; he described past municipal litigation over similar restrictions that incurred large legal fees. He recommended the council proceed carefully and avoid producing a detailed enforcement 'road map' in the public record.
Public testimony came from Remiel (Ward 3), John Schonenhaus, Jasmine Flores, Olivia Leader, Bree Irish (Benton County Democrats), Hunter Hawthorne and others. Speakers urged a ban on private ALPRs or at least strict limits on data sharing and retention. Several commenters said the cameras place LGBTQ people, immigrants and people of color at special risk if private companies share plate data with law enforcement or federal agencies.
Councilors and the attorney discussed narrower regulatory approaches: requiring clear signage where private ALPRs are in use (a model recently enacted in Minnesota was cited), limiting the use of networked/shared databases while still allowing closed systems for parking enforcement or membership gates, and pursuing state‑level legislative changes to give local jurisdictions clearer authority. The council asked the city attorney to research feasible ordinance language and for staff to consider signage requirements and to bring the item to a work session for further deliberation.
Next steps: the city attorney will research options (with attention to insurance and litigation exposure) and staff will draft potential signage language for discussion at a future work session; councilors discussed scheduling follow‑up in August.
