Lawmakers debate expanded use of license plate cameras

Franklin and others spoke glowingly about the effectiveness of automated license plate reader cameras in helping authorities to solve crimes and capture suspects.

However, a discussion at the Capitol about whether the state should allow for expanded use of such systems also turned to concerns about how the technology might represent a violation of the presumed right to privacy that Oklahomans might expect while simply driving down a road.

Notably, both Democrat and Republican lawmakers who took part in an interim study on use of the cameras raised questions about how their widescale deployment might violate the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution, which provides people with protection from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government.

To be clear, automated license plate readers already are in widespread use, including in Tulsa and in many other towns and cities. According to a “transparency portal” on the Tulsa Police Department’s website, the department uses 205 license plate readers provided by a private company called Flock Safety to record and retain for 30 days captured images of hundreds of thousands of license plates. The information is used for law enforcement purposes only and can be shared with other law enforcement agencies.

By contrast, the Oklahoma Turnpike Authority uses similar technology to capture images of license plates not for law enforcement purposes but for use in sending toll bills to owners of vehicles tagged with the plates.

Automated license plate readers, typically mounted on street poles, placed in police cars or on mobile trailers, capture all license plate numbers as vehicles pass. Locations, along with time and date, are then downloaded to a central server. Law enforcement agencies can preload license numbers that they’re looking for, such as tags of stolen vehicles, and if a camera captures an image of such a tag, an alert is sent out immediately.

Franklin said tag readers have been key to solving crimes, including homicide.

“When we activated those license plate readers, it was like the lights came on and we were able to see so much. It has been a game-changer for us,” he said.

After Tulsa police investigating a murder entered license plate information of the victim into the system, a license plate reader in Houston, Texas, soon spotted the vehicle, Franklin said. The driver of the vehicle, who was detained, admitted to killing the victim in Tulsa and stealing the car.

“So within 24 hours we were able to solve a homicide,” Franklin said. “I would say in over 50% of our homicides those license plate readers are in some way, shape or form leveraged.”

The former chief predicted that if legislation is passed allowing systems to be placed along state highways, “that would be a game-changer, as well.”

“I would love to see the state of Oklahoma allow adoption of these across some of our networks and our highways,” he said.

Others expressed the same view, including Rogers County Undersheriff Jon Sappington, who spoke on behalf of the Oklahoma Sheriffs’ Association, and Tecumseh Police Chief JR Kidney, who represented the Oklahoma Association of Chiefs of Police.

Trent Shores, a former U.S. attorney now in private practice in Oklahoma, said that while it’s important to address concerns about privacy issues, the advantages of utilizing plate reader technology should not be overlooked. He added that courts have been supportive of their use.

Some lawmakers who took part in the interim study organized by the Senate Public Safety Committee raised questions about how even more widespread use of high-speed, computer-controlled cameras might infringe upon the rights of the public.

When state Sen. Michael Brooks, D-Oklahoma City, asked if it might be possible for Oklahomans to “opt out” of a system that would allow their movements to be essentially tracked by government agencies, Franklin and others responded only that they might choose not to drive.

Former state Sen. Jake Merrick, a Republican who represented the Oklahoma City area, questioned whether any limits would be placed on use of the technology.

“Will we get to pre-crime predictions and drones that follow us everywhere? Do we want ultimate safety at all costs, or are we willing to prioritize freedom? I see the value in this, but I think we must also check it with concerns and be careful about the parameters that we set around it,” he said.

Sen. Warren Hamilton, R-McCurtain, recalled a quote by Benjamin Franklin: “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

The Tulsa World is where your story lives