Automated License
Plate Reader
Cameras
August 18, 2026
• Address public interest in Automated License Plate Reader (ALPR) cameras in the City
• Describe the Peninsula’s Motorola ALPR camera program, operated by LASD
• Describe the Public Safety Reimbursement Program
• Discuss California SB 34 and recent court rulings that have complicated the community’s use of ALPR cameras.
Purpose & Scope
Security Cameras 101
ALPR Cameras Surveillance Cameras
• Photograph license plates
• Primarily for law enforcement
• Strict state regulations on data
• Major companies: Motorola
Solutions, Flock Safety
• General purpose video recording
• Home and business monitoring
• Generally permitted if it respects
privacy and excludes audio
• Major companies: Ring, Google Nest
• Motorola Solutions
• Hardware owned by
Peninsula Cities
• Software operated by LASD
• Images viewed by LASD
ALPR Cameras on the
Peninsula
• Flock Safety
• Hardware leased by
neighborhoods
• LASD can access for
investigative purposes
• In 2016, Rancho Palos Verdes, Palos
Verdes Estates, Rolling Hills, and
Rolling Hills Estates established a
joint project to purchase and install
ALPR cameras.
• Images are accessed by law
enforcement agencies only: Palos
Verdes Estates PD and LASD
Peninsula Cities’ ALPR
Cameras
• A City program that provides
partial financial assistance to
individuals and neighborhoods
for safety enhancing tools such
as security cameras.
Public Safety
Reimbursement Grant
Program
Core requirements:
• Usage and Privacy Policy
• Data Retention
• Data Security
• Restricted Data Sharing
• Access Logging
• Data Breach Notification
State Law Governing
ALPR Data and Privacy
• Bartholomew v. Parking Concepts, Inc.
(Feb 2026): Failure to implement or post a
privacy policy is a legally actionable “harm”
• Mata v. Digital Recognition Network,
Inc. (May 2026): Opposite conclusion – there
must be a showing of concrete harm
• Bottom Line: The legal landscape is shifting,
but the safest course is for ALPR operators
and users to have a privacy policy
Court Decisions
LASD Privacy Policy
Sections:
I. Authorized Purposes for Use of ALPR
Technology
II. Persons Authorized to Use or Access
ALPR Technology/Data
III. Guidelines Regarding Appropriate Use
IV. Quality Assurance
V. Sharing and Disclosure
VI. Information Retention and
Destruction
VII. Accountability
VIII. Custodian of ALPR System and
Records
IX. Training
Application to small-scale
ALPR users
• Bartholomew v. Parking Concepts, Inc.
(Feb 2026): Failure to implement or post a
privacy policy is a legally actionable “harm”
• Mata v. Digital Recognition Network,
Inc. (May 2026): Opposite conclusion – there
must be a showing of concrete harm
• Bottom Line: The legal landscape is shifting,
but the safest course is for ALPR operators
and users to have a privacy policy
Additional Information
• Research: Understanding the
history of both ALPR programs
and privacy compliance
requirements
• Education: Sharing what we
learn with the community and
Peninsula Cities
• Advocacy: Letter to State
Legislature
Automated License
Plate Reader
Cameras
August 18, 2026