California, U.S. lawmakers debate license plate reader technology

Written by Cal Matters. By Ryan Sabalow, CalMatters.

Key points

• Tustin Police Chief Sean Thuilliez, president of the California Police Chiefs Association, remarked the technology assisted clear an innocent man.
• Since 2019, California Democratic lawmakers have unsuccessfully sought to further restrict how police employ the technology.
• The Berkeley Police Department observed similar successes after 52 Flock cameras were installed last year.
• At least 39 police agencies and officers' unions oppose Senate Bill 1013.
• Newsom additionally stated there was no funds in the budget to pay for the mandatory California Department of Justice audits last year's bill would have required.

This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.

Previously year alone, they've supported catch suspected murderers, bank robbers and hit-and-run drivers. They've located dozens of stolen cars and supported send a wildland arsonist to prison.

They're additionally distrusted and despised by privacy rights activists on the left and on the right. Just last month, police accused a suspect in Monterey County of yanking down three of them with his pickup.

They're called automated license plate readers. Every day, untold numbers of Californians drive past the thousands of cameras that at least 230 police and sheriffs' departments have posted along roadways or installed on their patrol cars. The cameras in real time capture and read plate numbers, then cross-reference them with law enforcement databases of vehicles police want to locate, such as stolen cars, getaway vehicles or those that may be carrying a missing or wanted person.

Since 2019, California Democratic lawmakers have unsuccessfully sought to further restrict how police employ the technology. They're trying again this year with a bill that would add limits on how long police may retain license plate data, how they access it and with whom they share it.

Police agencies and officers' unions throughout the state oppose the latest measure. It is similar to a bill Gov. Gavin Newsom vetoed last year.

"This bill is about one simple principle: Protecting the privacy and safety of Californians while ensuring law enforcement tools are used responsibly before it's too late, " the author of this year's legislation, Riverside Democratic Sen. Sabrina Cervantes, informed the Assembly privacy committee last month. She did not respond to a request for an interview from CalMatters.

Critics of the technology cite high-profile examples of California police using license plate data inappropriately, including to stalk or harass innocent individuals. As CalMatters documented last year, California officers have repeatedly violated an 11-year-old state law that prohibits sharing the data with federal authorities and others outside the state.

404 Media additionally noted last year that a Texas cop searched a national license plate database to try to locate a woman who had an abortion, leading to fears that conservative states that criminalize abortion are accessing California's plate data to hunt down patients or providers.

Cervantes' bill would generally limit to 30 days the amount of time agencies could keep license plate data, unless it pertains to an active investigation or is part of a search for missing individuals. It additionally sets limits around who can access the data and adds training and search-tracking requirements.

Police and sheriffs' departments would be prohibited from entering into contracts with camera firms that provide default access to plate databases that federal and out-of-state police can search.

That provision is in response to Flock Safety, a prominent license plate reader firm that allowed federal authorities to search local license plate data as part of a pilot program, stated Tracy Rosenberg of Oakland Privacy, one of the bill's supporters. "(Police departments) learned after the fact, like our advocates did, " Rosenberg remarked. "And we all said, 'What the.' You know, pick your four-letter word."

Flock Safety did not respond to CalMatters' request for an interview, but the firm states on its website that it doesn't work with immigration agencies and it halted its federal pilot programs. Local agencies have total control over the data Flock readers collect, the firm stated. "By default, sharing with federal agencies is disabled, " the firm wrote. "ICE does not have direct access to Flock cameras, systems or data." Why police are resisted.

At least 39 police agencies and officers' unions oppose Senate Bill 1013. Combined, they have spent at least $5.6 million on legislative campaigns since 2000, according to the CalMatters Digital Democracy database.

Police say the technology has proven invaluable at helping them solve crimes.

Tustin Police Chief Sean Thuilliez, president of the California Police Chiefs Association, remarked the technology assisted clear an innocent man. It additionally identified a suspected killer when a woman was shot and killed on a street in the Orange County city in May.

Notably, the woman had just testified against her ex-husband in a restraining order case, making him a prime suspect, Thuilliez remarked. According to But Thuilliez, thanks to the city's 102 license plate readers, eight of which are from Flock, detectives swiftly ruled out her ex-husband and were able to apprehend her former boyfriend at the Mexico border. He's now charged with first-degree murder.

"It's technology mixed with good investigative work, " he remarked in an interview. "But within one weekend, we were able to arrest the suspect for this person's murder."

For context, the Berkeley Police Department observed similar successes after 52 Flock cameras were installed last year. In a report to the Berkeley City Council, the department observed license plate readers had been employed in 121 cases, contributed to 58 arrests and led to the recovery of 37 stolen vehicles. The department observed its rate for solving robbery cases climbed from 34% in 2024 to 49% the after year, thanks in part to the license plate data. "The technology has fundamentally improved how officers patrol and how detectives investigate crimes spanning a range of serious offenses including robbery, kidnapping, carjacking, burglary, weapons violations, organized retail theft, stolen property and DUI, " the report remarked.

Why Newsom vetoed last year's bill.

Such investigative success stories may have supported persuade Newsom to veto last year's bill. It would have required police to dump their license plate data within 60 days.

In his veto message, he remarked the restrictions on sharing data and forcing departments to purge it could hinder officers' ability to solve cold cases and find missing residents.

To address Newsom's reservations, this year's proposal allows police to retain data to locate missing residents and it makes a state audit program contingent on future funding.

Newsom's press office declined to say whether he has a position on the latest bill. It has advanced through the Legislature with only Republicans voting against it. The measure is now pending before the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

Meanwhile, at least one Republican lawmaker is taking the matter to Congress. U.S. Rep. Thomas Massie of Kentucky lately shared a meme of a "Don't Tread on Me" snake wrapped around a camera. For context, the riff on the yellow Gadsden flag notes, "Don't Flock me." "I'll soon be sponsoring a bill to withhold federal money from municipalities and police departments that deploy Flock (and other style) cameras to surveil law-abiding citizens, " Massie wrote on Facebook.

Rosenberg of Oakland Privacy remarked she understands the cameras' usefulness to California police, but she thinks they've become ubiquitous. Police, she remarked, additionally shouldn't have a permanent pass to keep "mountains" of data for as long as they want.

"There is kind of a balancing act. We as human beings additionally need some camera-free space, " she stated. "We don't want to be on camera every minute of every single day."

In short, california, U.S. Lawmakers debate license plate reader technology is the central thread here, and readers can expect follow-up reporting as the picture becomes clearer.