BILL ANALYSIS Ó ------------------------------------------------------------ |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 1330| |Office of Senate Floor Analyses | | |1020 N Street, Suite 524 | | |(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | | |327-4478 | | ------------------------------------------------------------ THIRD READING Bill No: SB 1330 Author: Simitian (D) Amended: 5/29/12 Vote: 21 SENATE TRANSPORTATION & HOUSING COMMITTEE : 5-3, 3/27/12 AYES: DeSaulnier, Kehoe, Pavley, Rubio, Simitian NOES: Gaines, Harman, Wyland NO VOTE RECORDED: Lowenthal SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE : 3-2, 4/24/12 AYES: Evans, Corbett, Leno NOES: Harman, Blakeslee SUBJECT : License plate recognition technology SOURCE : Author DIGEST : This bill places restrictions on the use of license plate recognition (LPR) technology by private entities, including restrictions on the retention, use, and sale of such data. Senate Floor Amendments of 5/29/12 authorize a person to sell or distribute LPR data to limited individuals or entities, as specified, for purposes of collection of outstanding parking tickets, enforcement of local parking ordinances, or recovery or attempted recovery of collateral that requires registration with the Department of Motor Vehicles. CONTINUED SB 1330 Page 2 ANALYSIS : Existing law, the California Constitution, provides that all people have inalienable rights, including the right to pursue and obtain privacy. (California Constitution, Article I, Section 1) Existing law permits the California Highway Patrol (CHP) to retain license plate data captured by a license plate reader for no more than 60 days, except in circumstances when the data is being used as evidence or for all felonies being investigated, including, but not limited to, auto theft, homicides, kidnaping, burglaries, elder and juvenile abductions, Amber Alerts, and Blue Alerts. (Vehicle Code (VEH) Section 2413(b)) Existing law prohibits the CHP from selling LPR data for any purpose and making it available to an agency that is not a law enforcement agency or an individual who is not a law enforcement officer. The data may be used by a law enforcement agency only for purposes of locating vehicles or persons when either are reasonably suspected of being involved in the commission of a public offense. (VEH Section 2413(c)) Existing law requires the CHP to monitor internal use of the LPR data to prevent unauthorized use. (VEH Section 2413(d)) Existing law requires the CHP to report to the Legislature its LPR practices and usage, including the number of LPR data disclosures, a record of the agencies to which data was disclosed and for what purpose, and any changes in policy that affect privacy concerns. (VEH Section 2413(e)) This bill: 1. Imposes the following restrictions on any person who uses LPR technology other than a state or local law enforcement agency: the person shall not retain license plate data captured by LPR technology for more than 60 days; the person shall not sell LPR data for any SB 1330 Page 3 purpose and shall not make the data available to an agency or person that is not a law enforcement agency or officer; the person may sell or distribute LPR data to limited individuals or entities, as specified, for purposes of collection of outstanding parking tickets, enforcement of local parking ordinances, or recovery or attempted recovery of collateral that requires registration with the Department of Motor Vehicles; the person shall make data available to a law enforcement agency only pursuant to a search warrant. Unless the search warrant contains a provision to the contrary, the law enforcement agency shall immediately, but within no more than five days, notify the person whose information was disclosed that his/her records have been obtained. This bill requires the agency to give a copy of the search warrant to the person and include the identity of the agency or officer who received the records; and the person must allow a peace officer who is conducting a criminal or traffic collision investigation to obtain personally identifiable information of a person if the officer has good cause to believe that a delay in obtaining the information by seeking a search warrant would cause an adverse result, as specified. 2. Requires a person using LPR technology to monitor the internal use of LPR data to prevent its unauthorized use. 3. Requires a person using LPR technology to adopt a privacy policy to ensure that personally identifiable information is not unlawfully disclosed. 4. Requires a person using LPR technology to report annually to the Department of Justice on its LPR practices and usage, including the number of LPR data disclosures, a record of the law enforcement agencies or peace officers to which data was disclosed and for what SB 1330 Page 4 purpose, and any changes in policy that affect privacy concerns. 5. Provides that any person whose information is sold or disclosed in violation of this bill's provisions relating to the use of LPR technology by persons other than a state or local law enforcement agency may bring a civil action and shall be entitled to recover any and all consequential and incidental damages, including all costs and attorney's fees. Background License plate technology uses cameras and computer technology to record license plate information of vehicles. The cameras are either mobile (e.g., attached to the outside of a vehicle) or stationary, and the images they collect of license plate numbers are converted into computer-readable data which is then instantly checked against various databases such as the National Crime Information Center. LPR technology captures other data as well, including the geographic location of the vehicle and the time and date that it is scanned. This information can then be retained in a database. The technology works at lightning speed; one company, VeriPlate, indicates that its cameras can capture one license plate every second. Law enforcement uses LPR technology to identify and locate stolen vehicles or compare the information obtained against databases of outstanding warrants. Auto repossession companies take advantage of LPR technology to help find debtors who are behind on their car payments. In January 2012, a California Watch article entitled "Private company hoarding license-plate data on US drivers" noted: Capitalizing on one of the fastest-growing trends in law enforcement, a private California-based company has compiled a database bulging with more than 550 million license-plate records on both innocent and criminal drivers that can be searched by police. . . . ÝP]olice around the country have been affixing high-tech scanners to the exterior of their patrol cars, snapping a picture of every passing license plate and automatically comparing them to databases of outstanding warrants, SB 1330 Page 5 stolen cars, and wanted bank robbers. The units work by sounding an in-car alert if the scanner comes across a license plate of interest to police, whereas before, patrol officers generally needed some reason to take an interest in the vehicle, like a traffic violation. But when a license plate is scanned, the driver's geographic location is also recorded and saved, along with the date and time, each of which amounts to a record or data point. Such data collection occurs regardless of whether the driver is a wanted criminal, and the vast majority are not. While privacy rules restrict what police can do with their own databases, Vigilant Video, headquartered in Livermore, Calif., offers a loophole. It's a private business not required to operate by those same rules. . . . Vigilant distinguished itself from competitors by going one step further and collecting hundreds of millions of scans to create what's known as the National Vehicle Location Service. A West Coast sales manager for the company, Randy Robinson, said the scanners - as well as data from them compiled in the location system - do far more than simply help identify stolen vehicles. Stories abound of the technology also being used by police to stop wanted killers, bank robbers, and drug suspects. Kidnappers could be intercepted, too. Existing law restricts the use of LPR technology by the CHP. In 2011, the Legislature passed and the Governor signed AB 115 (Assembly Budget Committee), Chapter 38, Statutes of 2011, the transportation budget trailer bill, which allowed the CHP to retain data captured by LPR technology for no more than 60 days except as specified. The bill also prohibited the CHP from selling the data or making it available to anyone other than law enforcement. FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No Local: No SUPPORT : (Verified 5/29/12) American Civil Liberties Union California Partnership to End Domestic Violence SB 1330 Page 6 California Public Interest Research Group Consumer Federation of California Electronic Frontier Foundation Gun Owners of California Privacy Rights Clearinghouse OPPOSITION : (Verified 5/29/12) Association for Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs California District Attorneys Association California Narcotic Officers' Association California Police Chiefs Association California Public Parking Association California State Sheriffs' Association Chief Probation Officers of California Cities of Bellflower, Beverly Hills, Lakewood, and Palmdale League of California Cities (initial opposition) Los Angeles Police Protective League MuniServices MVTrac Riverside Sheriffs' Association ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author: Several private entities have "scout cars" that cruise city streets, parking lots, and highways to track the surrounding vehicles with LPR. One company claims to scan 40 percent of the vehicles in the country on an annual basis; another says that it captures data on 50 million vehicles each month. This data is sold to financial institutions, repossession companies, and private investigators. Today, there are no regulations on this practice. In fact, LPR records can be sold to any person or organization for any purpose. This poses public safety risks and threatens Californians' constitutional right to privacy. Senate Bill 1330 establishes rules of the road for the use of LPR by private entities. Other states like New Jersey and Utah have imposed regulations on LPR; Maine prohibits private entities from utilizing the technology altogether, and New Hampshire does not even permit law SB 1330 Page 7 enforcement to use LPR. This bill is supported by the Consumer Federation of California which writes that the measure will "safeguard Californians' constitutional right to individual privacy by reining in the use, and increasing abuse, of license-plate recognition (LPR) software on both innocent and criminal drivers. . . . Innocent Californians should not be having their vehicles monitored, potentially tracked, and that data stored and then sold for profit to third parties like asset recovery companies and financial institutions (among others) - all without their knowledge or consent." ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : The California District Attorneys Association states, "Our opposition stems from the fact that district attorneys presently obtain the data in question without the use of a search warrant and that adding a search warrant requirement is unduly burdensome. Additionally, we are concerned about the requirement that mandates law enforcement to notify the person whose information has been disclosed unless each search warrant contains a provision to the contrary. This requirement, notwithstanding the exigent circumstance provision in the bill, could have the effect of jeopardizing and/or delaying an ongoing criminal investigation and/or prosecution." JJA:kc 5/29/12 Senate Floor Analyses SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE **** END ****