The Votes Are In!
2024 Readers' Choice is back, bigger and better than ever!
View Winners → 
ALPR Surveillance Records Disclosed to Pasadena Civil Liberties Activist
News Nov 02, 2017
Photo used for illustration only. – Courtesy photo by Tony Webster
by
share with
Photo used for illustration only. – Courtesy photo by Tony Webster
The Pasadena Police Department released 20 surveillance records on the auto of civil liberties activist Ed Washatka in response to his Public Records Act request. The 20 surveillance records cover the one-year period from Oct. 1, 2016 – Sept. 30, 2017, that the PD’s Automatic License Plate Reader system captured and maintained on Washatka’s auto while it was parked on or driving on Pasadena streets – an average of one ALPR surveillance record every 18 days.
While the overall annual average was one surveillance record every 18 days, during a peak period in March – April 2017, the average had a 300 percent spike to one surveillance record every six days. The surveillance records characteristically include the license plate number, the date, the time, and the location of every ALPR scan.
Washatka stated, “I don’t have a problem with the PD using the ALPR scanner to obtain a surveillance record of a stolen auto, a suspect in an active investigation, or other narrowly-tailored specific law-enforcement activities. The problem is the PD’s 2-year retention policy for ALPR surveillance records where there is no specific law enforcement objective. It is disturbing that the Pasadena PD has created an enormous database of the movement of residents who have not stolen autos, are not suspects in an active investigation, and whose data is retained without specific law enforcement justification.”
“That data can be misused for personal purpose such as a rogue cop tracking the movements of his estranged sister. The retention of dragnet surveillance records brings back memories of the McCarthy era and local police “red squads” who surveilled progressive political activity. The PD needs to promptly use ALPR surveillance records for legitimate law enforcement purposes but not retain the surveillance records beyond their intended use. The retention of a massive database on the movements of residents shows the same disrespect for resident privacy as does the City’s contract with Spokeo that brings to it a massive data base of unreliable social media information about residents.”
More from News
