|
In recent weeks, I've heard from many constituents with questions about the use of automated license plate readers (ALPRs), often called Flock cameras because many of the systems are operated by Flock Safety. There's also been confusion between these cameras and automated speed or red-light enforcement, so it's important to explain the difference.
These are two very different technologies that serve different purposes.
ALPR cameras are investigative tools used by law enforcement. They do not issue speeding tickets or red-light citations. Instead, they scan license plates and can notify police when a vehicle is connected to a missing person, an AMBER or Silver Alert, a kidnapping, a wanted suspect, or another active criminal investigation.
Speed and red-light cameras are designed for a different purpose altogether. Their goal is to improve roadway safety by reducing dangerous driving behaviors, encouraging compliance with traffic laws, and helping prevent crashes that put drivers, cyclists, pedestrians, and others at risk.
Connecticut has some of the strongest laws in the nation governing the use of speed and red-light cameras. Municipalities cannot simply install them wherever they choose. Each location must go through a state approval process, and there are clear limits on when citations may be issued. Drivers generally are not cited unless they are traveling at least 10 miles per hour over the speed limit or fail to stop for a steady red light. During the first 30 days after a new system is activated, only warnings are issued. Every citation is reviewed before it is sent, and fines are limited by state law.
These programs were never intended to generate revenue for cities or towns. Their purpose is to encourage safer driving. Success means fewer violations, fewer crashes, and ultimately fewer citations. Communities that have implemented these systems are already reporting positive trends in reducing speeding and improving traffic safety.
At the same time, I understand why many people are concerned about privacy when it comes to automated license plate readers. Across the country, there have been well-publicized examples of ALPR data being used in ways that raise legitimate civil liberties concerns, including investigations involving reproductive health care, immigration enforcement, and other sensitive matters. More recently, questions have been raised after reports that agencies outside Connecticut, including the Florida Highway Patrol, accessed ALPR data collected here.
Those concerns are valid and deserve thoughtful attention.
Recognizing those issues, the Connecticut General Assembly strengthened state law during the 2026 legislative session, and Governor Ned Lamont signed those changes into law.
Under the updated law, Connecticut agencies may share ALPR data only with law enforcement agencies in neighboring states — Massachusetts, New York, and Rhode Island — and only if those states agree not to use the information for immigration enforcement or investigations involving reproductive or gender-affirming health care.
The legislation also raises the standard for obtaining ALPR information. Requests must now be supported by a judge-approved probable cause warrant, rather than a broad or undefined investigative request. In addition, the amount of time municipalities may retain license plate data has been reduced from 30 days to 21 days.
I believe we can support effective law enforcement while also protecting the privacy and constitutional rights of Connecticut residents. But it must be accompanied by clear legal safeguards, transparency, and accountability.
I will continue paying close attention to how these systems are used in Connecticut. If experience shows that additional protections are needed to safeguard privacy and prevent misuse, I will work with my colleagues to strengthen those protections while preserving the legitimate public safety benefits these tools can provide.
|
