Flock Safety cameras capture license plates. (Photo courtesy of Flock Safety)
The General Assembly is gearing up to rein in on the growing use of automated license plate readers (ALPRs) by law enforcement, a move prompted by the Virginia Crime Commission, which voted Friday to pursue new regulations.
ALPRs — cameras that capture a vehicle’s license plate along with its location, date and time — have exploded in popularity nationwide, used by everyone from businesses to homeowner associations to law enforcement agencies.
And while law enforcement agencies are using them in Virginia, use is yet to be state-regulated.
A proposal from House Majority Leader Charniele Herring, D-Alexandria, would restrict police use of ALPRs to specific investigations, such as missing person cases, outstanding warrants, human trafficking or stolen vehicles or plates. Law enforcement would also need a permit from the Department of Transportation to install cameras on state roads.
Herring’s bill also seeks to increase transparency, requiring data collection on whether police stops or detentions stemmed from ALPR alerts.
Other states regulate how long police can retain ALPR data, with time frames ranging from three minutes in New Hampshire to five years in Alabama. Virginia lawmakers may consider similar restrictions as they debate the issue.
A presentation last November highlighted both benefits and concerns tied to law enforcement’s use of the technology.
Crime Commission Deputy Director Colin Drabert emphasized that ALPR technology doesn’t directly identify individuals, although law enforcement agencies can share data with other public and private entities that use ALPR.
Drabert said that police must access separate databases to determine who owns a vehicle that was flagged by the technology. He noted that ALPR systems alert law enforcement to vehicles on a “hot list,” including stolen vehicles or license plates, vehicles linked to criminal activity, or those connected to missing persons.
However, with ALPR use largely unregulated nationwide, concerns have grown over privacy violations and the potential for misuse. During Friday’s commission meeting, legal experts called for safeguards as lawmakers prepare to regulate the technology.
Ruby Cherian, an attorney with the Legal Aid Justice Center, warned that ALPR use “might increase unjustified law enforcement contact” with individuals. She urged legislators to ensure that contracts between law enforcement agencies and ALPR companies are subject to public scrutiny under the Freedom of Information Act.
Concerns were also raised about how the use of ALPR might clash with the Fourth Amendment, which protects against unreasonable searches or seizures.
“As these devices proliferate even more, the saturation of ALPR in communities may become so great that it could trigger Fourth amendment protections,” said Chris Kaiser, policy director at the American Civil Liberties Union of Virginia.
While some supported regulating ALPR use, others defended ALPR use.
Dana Schrad, director of the Virginia Association of Police Chiefs, defended the technology as “an invaluable tool” that provides critical information to law enforcement and that her organization would like to see amendments on the bill. As it works its way through committees, Herring added that is where further debate and amendments can occur.
Schrad also noted that some departments in Virginia have used ALPR for years without widespread reports of misuse.
House Speaker Don Scott, D-Portsmouth, pushed back on that assertion. “That’s prior to the proliferation of these things,” he said. “They’re more widespread. The problem may have not been noticed then because they were in less use”
YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE.