Bipartisan bill would limit police use of license plate scanners

2013-11-20T05:30:00Z Bipartisan bill would limit police use of license plate scannersMATTHEW DeFOUR | Wisconsin State Journal | | 608-252-6144

The growing police practice of recording and storing civilian license plate images would be restrained under a bill proposed by a bipartisan group of state lawmakers.

The bill, circulated for co-sponsorship Tuesday by Rep. David Craig, R-Vernon, Rep. Fred Kessler, D-Milwaukee, and Sen. Tom Tiffany, R-Hazelhurst, relates to automated license plate readers, which use multiple cameras mounted on a police car to record the date, time and location of every passing vehicle.

“We have technology advances that are imperiling civil liberties,” Craig said in an interview Tuesday. “You have this technology that has been used that without limits by the Legislature can lead to some very, very bad outcomes for constitutional rights.”

The State Journal reported in July that several police agencies in Wisconsin have vehicles equipped with the cameras recording images 24 hours a day.

Four agencies in Dane County — Fitchburg, Middleton, Sun Prairie and Verona — have collected and stored millions of images in recent years and planned to keep them for seven years.

A consortium of local police agencies, including those four, approved a policy Monday limiting the retention of those images to a year.

Madison police officers don’t use the technology, but parking enforcement vehicles do.

The bill would allow the cameras to be turned on only during the investigation of a crime. It also would prohibit sharing the stored information with non-government entities and require data destruction within 48 hours, unless it was necessary for a criminal investigation.

Craig said police also should be allowed to use the technology during emergency situations, such as a missing person, though the bill draft released Tuesday doesn’t allow for that.

Five Dane County police chiefs who are part of a data-sharing consortium issued a statement Tuesday calling the bill “unfortunate.”

“We have been responsibly using the (license plate readers) since October of 2010 and have not received any complaints of violating civil rights or misuse of the data,” they said. “This proposed legislation is contrary to ensuring that law enforcement has the tools needed to effectively enforce our state’s laws.”

The State Journal investigation, which the bill authors cite in their sponsorship memo, found about 2.5 percent of the images captured in Dane County resulted in “potential hits,” meaning a computer recognized the plates from a database of vehicles that were either stolen or sought in connection with a crime. However, the technology doesn’t distinguish between state plates, so many of those hits were false positives.

Spokesmen for Senate Majority Leader Scott Fitzgerald, R-Juneau, and Gov. Scott Walker did not have comment on the bill. Assembly Speaker Robin Vos, R-Rochester, did not respond to a request for comment.

The American Civil Liberties Union in recent months has warned about the potential for the system to infringe on the privacy rights of civilians.

But police agencies defend their use of the technology, saying it can help recover stolen vehicles, find kidnapped children and identify suspects fleeing a crime scene. They compare the readers to a police officer on a stakeout, only with more perfect memory.

Jim Palmer, executive director of the Wisconsin Professional Police Association, said his board members have not discussed the proposal, but he expects they would oppose any broad restrictions on use of the technology.

At the same time, police agencies would appreciate guidelines on how long civilian plate records should be kept. He said they likely wouldn’t need to be kept longer than one or two weeks.

Craig said he could be flexible on the length of retention if there was a practical reason to keep records longer than 48 hours, which is a standard used in Minnesota.

But “seven years is unacceptable,” he said. “One year is unacceptable.”

The ACLU recommended five guidelines for acceptable use of the technology, including that it be used to investigate crimes, that data on innocent civilians be purged in a matter of days or weeks and that sharing data with third parties be restricted.

The organization also recommended allowing the public to find out if their own license plate information is in a law enforcement database and publicly reporting on use of the system at least annually.

Palmer said police agencies would support restrictions on sharing license plate information with third parties. However, he said he worries the bill would limit the sharing of aggregate data, such as the total number of license plate reads and hits that agencies record each month or year.

Craig said he would make sure the legislation allows agencies to share aggregate data with the public in order to inform policy decisions.

Copyright 2015 All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

(9) Comments

  1. scorp
    Report Abuse
    scorp - November 22, 2013 2:51 pm
    With all never cars containing the "black box" which monitors your driving ,this public diversion based upon "privacy" concerns is nothing . With Progressive Ins Co giving discounts for placing a personal monitor in your vehicle , all other ins co will likely mandate the same . THAT is the real invasion of privacy which is being forced upon us. Forget the cops new toys, pass a law that prohibits monitoring of the people or their vehicles. Most drivers are clueless as to what is happening .
  2. magnum1
    Report Abuse
    magnum1 - November 22, 2013 8:54 am
    OMG. Our freedoms are really going away. Soon we all will have monitors in our homes so our Government can watch everything we do. Watch out when you go outside, sombody may be watching you?.
  3. nufsenuf
    Report Abuse
    nufsenuf - November 20, 2013 4:22 pm
    If you really believe the law is adhered to, would you like to buy or bridge or even a less expensive healthcare policy, call 4843624831 (4thenaive1).
  4. LPR Facts
    Report Abuse
    LPR Facts - November 20, 2013 2:21 pm
    There are many myths surrounding the use of LPR technology. The license plate reader photographs the numbers and letters and does not identify the owner or driver
    of the vehicle. Every citizen is protected by the federal Drivers Privacy Protection Act (DPPA) which prohibits connecting an LPR photo to information about the registered owner of the vehicle.LPR laws limiting access to sensitive data (by extending the DPPA to LPR data) are more effective than laws that restrict the collection and retention of LPR. Watch this short video to separate the facts from the myths:
  5. mzd
    Report Abuse
    mzd - November 20, 2013 11:34 am
    If you are worried about this, you should be terrified of the smart tags that are appearing in things you buy. You'll have no way of know the shirt you are wearing has a smart tag in it and that the merchant has a database that connects that tag to your id. The merchant can then know when you walk through his front door and customize in store displays aimed at you.

    BTW, the legislature should also prohibit any private party from scanning and keeping license plate data.
  6. gobi
    Report Abuse
    gobi - November 20, 2013 7:50 am
    "no complaints received " - It's hard to complain when one doesn't even realize they are being spied on. Sort of like no one complaining about phone tapping. We live in a society where everyone is being watched 24/7. Sad.
  7. MrNatural
    Report Abuse
    MrNatural - November 19, 2013 11:41 pm
  8. Crow Barr
    Report Abuse
    Crow Barr - November 19, 2013 8:42 pm
    Laser focused on JOBS!
  9. nufsenuf
    Report Abuse
    nufsenuf - November 19, 2013 7:57 pm
    It would be nice to once again meet a policeman that was watching the road instead of the computer monitor. You can't go a day without seeing one guilty of inattentive driving, essentially the same as continuously texting for an 8 hour shift. Now when you add in the proverbial coffee and donuts watch out.

We provide a valuable forum for readers to exchange ideas and opinions on posted articles. But there are rules: Don't promote products or services, impersonate other site users, register multiple accounts, threaten or harass others, post vulgar, abusive, obscene or sexually oriented language. Don't post content that defames or degrades anyone. Don't repost copyrighted material; link to it. In other words, stick to the topic and play nice. Report abuses by clicking the button. Users who break the rules will be banned from commenting. We no longer issue warnings.

Add Comment
You must Login to comment.

Click here to get an account it's free and quick