A second bill seeking to limiting sharing of automated license plate reader (ALPR) data was recently referred to Connecticut’s legislative Committee on Judiciary. The bill would also exclude ALPR data from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).
Many of the bill’s provisions are similar to those contained in SB 4, a broader consumer privacy bill, which contains a section limiting the ability of law enforcement, the Department of Transportation (DOT), and the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) to enter contracts with ALPR providers if they do things like share data for immigration enforcement activities. The bill also prevents police, the DOT, and DMV from accessing ALPR data and excludes ALPR information, defined as data collected by ALPR cameras and analysis of ALPR data, from FOIA disclosure.
HB 5449 is solely focused on limiting the use of ALPR systems and the sharing of information collected by them.
The bill would prohibit public agencies and law enforcement from using ALPR systems and data except to monitor vehicle weight or equipment; perform weigh station duties; or compare data with information on hotlists, which flag vehicles wanted in association with a crime, or other law enforcement databases, such as the Federal Bureau of Investigations Kidnapping and Missing Persons list or the Federal Terrorist Screening Database. The bill also allows ALPRs to be used to assist in solving crime.
The bill would also limit how long data collected by ALPR cameras can be retained to a period of 7 days. Currently, data from ALPR systems is automatically purged after a set period of time, which differs depending on the system. For example, Flock Safety’s standard policy for its ALPR cameras retains data for 30 days unless a department specifies a different length of time.
HB 5449 also prohibits police and public agencies from using ALPR data to investigate an individual based on immutable characteristics like race and gender expression or their involvement in First Amendment protected activities. Further, the bill prohibits ALPR data from being shared for use in immigration enforcement activity or in investigations of people related to abortion or gender-affirming care. Those provisions are similar to SB 4.
Some ALPR systems require users to include a reason they are searching data. Reporting from CT Insider earlier this year found that ALPR data collected by Flock Safety cameras in six Connecticut towns were searched thousands of times for immigration enforcement purposes.
Additionally, the bill would not allow Connecticut agencies and police to share ALPR data with any agency outside of New York, Rhode Island, or Massachusetts and would prohibit ALPR cameras from being placed within a certain distance of facilities that provide reproductive or gender-affirming healthcare services or organizations that serve immigrants.
Like SB 4, HB 5549 also includes a provision exempting ALPR information from FOIA, though the language and scope of the exemption differ.
SB 4 exempts ALPR information, defined as information gathered by ALPR cameras or created through analysis of information gathered from ALPR cameras, from FOIA.
HB 5540 exempts ALPR data from FOIA. The bill defines ALPR data to include “any data captured, recorded, stored, processed, or derived from an automated license plate reader system, including, but not limited to, license plate characters, vehicle still or video images, vehicle attributes, location data, time stamps and metadata.”
It does specify that locations of ALPR cameras may be disclosed through FOIA, as may data “derived from any audit of an automated license plate reader system, usage logs for such system and logs detailing access to automated license plate reader data” so long as it is redacted.
The language of that exemption would more explicitly still allow FOIA requests related to search logs of ALPR data, which reporters and journalists have used to show how ALPR data is being accessed by law enforcement across the country.
Additionally, the Police Officer Standards and Training Council (POSTC) is directed to create a standardized reporting form containing information about what data is collected by ALPR cameras, who accessed it, and how many times data collected by ALPR cameras matched law enforcement investigations into crimes.
The law also requires public agencies and police departments that use ALPR cameras to adopt and publicize policies for the use of ALPR systems. It further places limits on contracts with private vendors that access ALPR data on behalf of an agency, prohibiting them from selling or sharing data.
The bill also stipulates that individuals can bring legal action against employees of agencies using ALPRs if they violate restrictions on how data can be accessed or shared, including if they release data through FOIA, exempted by the bill.
Transparency Note: Katherine Revello is a member of the Connecticut Council on Freedom of Information’s board of directors. CCFOI submitted testimony, written by Revello, opposing the proposed FOIA exemption in SB 4. She is also currently involved in a complaint against the Manchester Police Department with the Freedom of Information Commission over its denial of access to ALPR data. MPD denies it can access the data because it is maintained by Flock.
Was this article helpful?
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
