San Diego Weighs Removing License Plate Readers Amid Privacy Backlash

(TNS) — The balance is tipping more in favor of shutting down automated license plate readers in San Diego.

During a budget committee meeting Wednesday, several San Diego council members backed a proposal to rescind city approval of the use of the controversial technology and end the city’s contract to use ALPR cameras provided by Flock.

Councilmember Kent Lee, who last year voted in support of the technology, pointed to fears in San Diego communities that the data the cameras collect could be turned against them

“I recognize that it is time to act,” Lee said. “It’s time for us to prioritize the protection of civil rights and liberties for our residents. It’s time to prioritize our limited public dollars to protect the services and the everyday public safety needs that our communities have shared.”

He is joined on the committee by Councilmembers Sean Elo-Rivera, Henry Foster III and Vivian Moreno, and all four voted to stop using the readers.

The four votes to drop the technology, coupled with Councilmember Stephen Whitburn’s recent announcement that he is withdrawing support for using ALPRs, would be enough of a shift for the city to stop using the cameras. The question would have to come before the full council, and that could happen before the end of the year. It would take a 6-3 vote to remove the cameras to override a veto by the mayor, who supports keeping the cameras.

Just what happens next is unclear. Under the city’s 2023 surveillance ordinance, the full City Council reviews its use of such technology annually. That review is expected before the end of the year.

The city of San Diego has 500 surveillance cameras and ALPR technology attached to streetlights citywide. The cameras record information — including plate number, make, model, color and distinguishing markings such as bumper stickers — on all vehicles in their view, then store it in a searchable database. The police department holds on to the data for 30 days unless it is used in an investigation

After the committee vote, Police Chief Scott Wahl said in a statement that removing the cameras would make it harder for officers to solve crimes.

“We don’t have to guess whether ALPR helps solve crimes. We’ve seen it work in more than 900 cases, from stolen vehicles and kidnappings to murders,” he said.

Police have repeatedly asked the city to keep the technology, and Wahl has argued that his department follows the city’s strict rules, including keeping its data on a metaphorical island inaccessible to other agencies.

Mayor Todd Gloria, who also wants the ALPRs to stay on, said in a statement after Wednesday’s vote that the city has “established the strongest privacy protections and public oversight,” including reviews and audits.

“Elected leaders shouldn’t be making life easier for criminals. We should be making it easier for our constituents,” he said, urging the full council to support keeping the readers.

Automated license plate readers have become increasingly controversial, locally and nationwide, particularly as the Trump administration has ramped up immigration enforcement. Critics argue it creates a mass surveillance network and tramples civil rights, particularly in marginalized communities. The cameras, they argue, can reveal a person’s travel patterns — where they work, go to school, shop, worship and more. And they point to reports from across the country of abuses of the information by law enforcement.

San Diego has seen so much pushback against surveillance technologies in recent years that in 2023 the city passed an ordinance requiring the City Council to review — with an eye toward civil rights — all surveillance the city uses each year. The city also created the Privacy Advocacy Board to review tech in the same vein.

Foster, who leads the budget committee and brought Wednesday’s item forward, said his conversations with community members “typically end with tears, very emotional, and it truly is from a place of fear.”

“If we are talking about public safety, I don’t understand how we are OK with people, humans, being fearful, being scared to leave their house, thinking they are being mass surveilled.”

On Wednesday, roughly four dozen people spoke out during the meeting’s public comment portion, including one teen wearing a makeshift Flock camera as a helmet of sorts. Nearly all the speakers railed against ALPRs, and one likened the cameras to vampires. “They cannot come into our homes unless we invite them,” said a caller identified only as Nicholas. “Once they are in our homes, it will suck the blood out of our streets.”

As the city grapples with budget concerns, critics have argued the money spent on APLRs could be better used elsewhere.

“The community has been right all along,” Elo-Rivera said before Wednesday’s vote. “The community was right to ask for investments in libraries, parks, rec centers and youth programs instead of creepy surveillance.”

The readers are a package deal with surveillance cameras placed in streetlights — two separate technologies — and the contract costs the city $2 million a year. The cameras are provided by a company called Ubiquia, which contracts with Flock to supply the software.

“Without the ALPR technology, what’s left is effectively a normal security camera,” police spokesperson Ashley Nicholes said.

In June, a report from the city’s Office of Independent Budget Analyst noted that the city would need to renegotiate the Ubiquia contract to determine any potential savings.

In a Zoom call with reporters Tuesday, Flock’s senior spokesperson, Trevor Chandler, said San Diego police have “implemented a national gold standard in transparency and oversight into their license plate reader program, and even still, politicians threw them under the bus.”

“If the council decides to end their ALPR program, hate crimes will go unsolved, and missing children will not be found — not because of SDPD, but because politicians put election year politics over effective policy,” he said.

He said police investigators in locales that took down the cameras have been hindered in solving cases.

“This is not a binary choice,” he said. “This is not an either-or. This is about making sure that community safety doesn’t have to come at the expense of community values.”

San Diego’s fresh look at Flock and ALPRs comes as the city fights a lawsuit from local civil rights advocacy group Partnership for the Advancement of New Americans, which advocates for refugees and displaced people. The lawsuit seeks to end the city’s use of ALPRs, alleging the cameras and the database they create amount to an invasion of privacy rights under the state constitution.

The city is also facing a federal lawsuit from a man who alleges he was wrongfully jailed for a month after police using ALPRs targeted the wrong vehicle.

Staff writer David Garrick contributed to this report.

©2026 The San Diego Union-Tribune. Visit sandiegouniontribune.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.