Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Surveillance Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Members press for guardrails on automated license‑plate readers; state's attorney urges targeted rules
Summary
Committee members raised privacy and retention concerns about automated license‑plate reader programs ("Flock" cameras) and asked whether county boards should authorize their use; the state's attorney said misuse of LEADS has occurred and endorsed guardrails that preserve law‑enforcement utility while protecting rights.
Several members raised questions about automated license‑plate readers (sometimes cited as "Flock" cameras) and whether county boards should authorize their countywide use, how long data should be retained, and whether a judge should be required to sign a warrant for access. One member relayed collar‑county discussions that ranged from a three‑day to 60‑day retention window and urged definitive guardrails.
The State's Attorney's Office acknowledged the value of license‑plate readers to investigations but said there have been instances of misuse of LEADS and that guardrails are appropriate. "We've seen misuse of the leads system...when they do, it's official misconduct, and we prosecute them," the state's attorney said. He urged the committee to work with legislative leaders to craft rules that preserve law‑enforcement utility while minimizing privacy risk. Members asked staff to continue studying best practices and potential policy language.
