The technology is used by law enforcement across the country, including the Spokane County Sheriff's Office, which uses nearly 100 of the cameras in the county. But with no statewide regulation, lawmakers are concerned with when, and how, information from the cameras can be used.
"Right now, Washington state has no rules or laws in place to guide or respond to this powerful technology," state Sen. Yasmin Trudeau, D-Tacoma, told members of the Senate Law and Justice Committee Tuesday. "Without it, we are all in a position where we can be directly surveilled, and only the jurisdiction and the private company have unfettered access to the data to use in whatever way they deem important. That is a concern that we should all take very, very seriously."
As the technology grows in popularity, at least 16 states have instituted rules or guidelines for when and how the cameras can be used. The legislation currently under consideration follows recent privacy concerns over access to the data, a report that found the technology has been accessed by federal immigration enforcement in violation of state law and fears that the cameras increase improper surveillance.
The bill has received pushback from law enforcement, who say the technology has become invaluable in their work.
Trudeau said Tuesday that "allowing surveillance technologies without any oversight or regulation, I believe, is an affront to our state constitution."
"I brought this bill because I believe it's our job to figure out how to get this issue right," Trudeau said. "We want to have tools that help solve crimes. We all care when we have loved ones or we are impacted when criminal activity occurs. But we also want to ensure that the tools have safeguards in place so that they're actually meeting the expectations of Washingtonians when they're being used."
The bill is cosponsored by state Sen. Jeff Holy, R-Spokane, a former Spokane Police detective who said Tuesday it isn't in the form he would have drafted. But following "a bit of talking" with Trudeau, he became convinced it's not a partisan or legal issue.
"This is a 'being a private citizen in the state of Washington issue,' " Holy said. "Are we seriously going to argue that people don't have a reasonable expectation of privacy when it comes to every single movement being tracked? Especially when it concerns what time you drop your kids off at school? When and where you attend religious services? Which kind of doctor you're going to visit? It struck me."
If passed, the legislation would allow the cameras to be used to search for stolen vehicles, to find missing or endangered people, locate those with felony warrants or vehicles connected to the investigation of a felony. The cameras could also be used for parking enforcement, car tolling and for real-time traffic information by transportation agencies.
The cameras would be expressly prohibited in immigration enforcement and would not be allowed in the immediate surrounding of schools, places of worship, courts and food banks.
Agencies that use the cameras would also be required to register them with the attorney general's office and certify that they are in compliance with the law, and would need to delete the data in most scenarios within 72 hours.
The data collected would also be exempt from public disclosure laws.
Attorney General Nick Brown said Tuesday his team is "closely looking at the bill" and providing guidance to the lawmakers drafting it.
"I do think people are rightly concerned about the idea that their personal information is so easily gathered and potentially shared with others," Brown said. "But we're looking closely at that bill, and many others, that might get at people's privacy."
Holy said he's going to work with Trudeau on an "appropriate retention period" for the data for use in criminal investigations.
During his testimony, Holy said the bill "doesn't do anything other than restate the Keep Washington Working Act," the state law that limits local agencies cooperation with federal immigration enforcement.
"So it doesn't do any more damage, any less," Holy said. "It just leaves things as they are. I'm not a big proponent of that, but this bill does not enhance or degrade that. It just is what it is."
Tee Sannon, technology policy program director for the ACLU of Washington, told committee members Tuesday that the camera systems "collect sensitive data at massive scales about ordinary people who are not suspected of any wrongdoing."
The data collected, Sannon said, "should be retained for the shortest period of time possible."
"A 72-hour limit is a start, but shorter retention reduces the risk of misuse or breach," Sannon said.
On Tuesday, lawmakers heard from local police chiefs, who say the technology has become a vital tool in investigations. Andy Caldwell, the chief of the Centralia Police Department, said he "fully supports the need for legislative oversight to govern law enforcement use of automated license plate readers and to clarify recent conflicting lower court decisions in Washington state regarding disclosure of ALPR data."
According to Caldwell, though, discussions around the systems include a "considerable amount of disinformation." The systems, he said, are not "surveillance," but rather "data points in time."
"We don't know where you're going, we don't know who's in the car, we have no idea where you're coming from," Caldwell said. "It's just a data point that we use for investigations."
Ken Roske, the chief of police in Pasco, said he supports the bill's privacy goals, but as drafted, "several provisions would unintentionally undermine the effectiveness of the ALPR systems in investigations." The system, Roske said, should also be allowed to be used in serious misdemeanor crimes.
Senate Minority Leader John Braun, R-Centralia, said Tuesday that while he hadn't seen the bill, he has concerns about potentially restricting law enforcement.
"It's one of the many tools law enforcement uses to try and enforce the laws that we pass through the legislative process. If you don't like the law, we should change the law," Braun said. "But the idea that we want to restrict their ability to enforce the law seems counterintuitive to me."
State Sen. Mankha Dhingra, D-Remond, who chairs the law and justice committee, said during a media availability Tuesday that she has worked with Trudeau on the proposal for six months. Dhingra anticipates that it will likely move out of committee "in the next week or two."
" Sen. Holy has been an excellent partner. And that's what I love, it's a bipartisan bill in the Senate," Dhingra said. "And I think the testimony today and the statements made by both Sen. Trudeau and Sen. Holy really described the idea that this is something we need, that this is about making sure that we don't create a police state, that we have sensible regulations in place."
©2026 The Spokesman-Revie, Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
