Find Bill
Find Your Legislator
Legislative Deadlines
March 28, 2024
RSS Feed Permanent URL -A +A

Minutes for SB305 - Committee on Transportation

Short Title

Requiring each law enforcement agency that utilizes automated license plate recognition systems to adopt and maintain a detailed, written policy relating to the use and operation of such systems and prescribing restrictions and requirements relating to the collection, storage and sharing of captured license plate data.

Minutes Content for Thu, Mar 25, 2021

Chairperson Petersen opened the hearing on SB305.

Mr.Siebers briefed the Committee on the bill.  He explained that the bill would clarify law-enforcement agencies to could collect and store captured license plate data; the data could only be accessed for law-enforcement purposes and could not be used for commercial purposes.

Officer Casey Slaughter, Wichita Police Department, presented supporting information for the bill (Attachment 7).  Giving a brief history of collecting license-plate data, he said the department began capturing license-plate data in 2014 with two mobile units, an initiative which was expanded to include units fixed to a pole or traffic light.  He noted how effective the program has been by citing local statistics (e.g., 152 stolen vehicles recovered, 156 mostly felony arrests, significant amounts of drugs seized) and national theft data, and he recounted local stories to illustrate the positive benefits of license-plate surveillance.  He explained that the bill was prompted by KDOT liability concerns.

Mr. Slaughter responded to members' questions:

  • Transmitted data is encrypted by the vendor to assure confidentiality.
  • Privacy concerns are protected in four ways: clear policy statements, a thorough training program, a requirement that any data search must record a legitimate law-enforcement purpose, and regular audits.
  • The mobile units have been effective at outdoor events to be able to identify gang activity.

The Chair noted written-only support for the bill:

  • Phil Bostian, Chief of Police, Park City, Kansas (Attachment 8);
  • Ed Klumpp, Legislative Liaison, Kansas Association of Chiefs of Police, Kansas Sheriffs' Association, and Kansas Police Officers Association (Attachment 9); and

 Eric Sartorius, Executive Director, LKM, presented concerns as a neutral party (Attachment 10).  He commented that the bill's rapid development had precluded any involvement by cities or by KDOT, factors that should caution members in advancing the bill prematurely.  He assured members that issues of concern could be worked out given adequate time for interested entities to collaborate.

Written-only neutral testimony was provided by Colonel Herman Jones, Kansas Highway Patrol (Attachment 11).

Speaking in opposition to the bill, Kendall Seal, Director of Advocacy, American Civil Liberties Union, stated that the bill provides inadequate privacy protection, and placement location could indicate discriminatory practices.  He also expressed concern that insufficient oversight could expose personal data to the Kansas Open Records Act.  Responding to questions, he replied that the lack of clarity and the lack of structure could expose individuals to unwarranted surveillance, and he noted that there was no definitive statement regarding what constitutes a gang (Attachment 12).

A member requested additional information regarding how other states have approached the issue.

The hearing on SB305 was closed.