New Connecticut law brings transparency requirements to police license plate reader systems

Connecticut has begun implementing a new law establishing statewide standards for police use of automatic license plate reader (ALPR) technology, but state leaders say additional guidance is still needed as local agencies prepare to adopt written policies governing the systems.

The issue drew renewed attention Friday when Gov. Ned Lamont sent a letter to the Connecticut Police Officer Standards and Training Council (POST), writing that while Public Act 26-14, which took effect July 1, “went a long way in addressing and appropriately balancing” public safety and privacy concerns, questions remain about “what type of technology is being deployed, where these cameras are being installed, and how the data is being used and shared.”

Lamont asked POST to issue statewide guidance within 30 days identifying the various camera technologies now in use, explaining Connecticut law governing how data may be collected, retained and shared, discussing related state laws, and recommending policies agencies should adopt before deploying the technology. 

The governor’s letter followed a public statement by State Senator James Maroney, D-Milford-Orange-Woodbridge, and Senate Majority Leader Bob Duff, D-Norwalk, calling on municipalities to voluntarily pause installation of new Flock Safety camera systems while the state completes additional work on oversight and privacy protections. They also asked the Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection to conduct a statewide survey identifying the number and location of license plate reader cameras and said they plan to introduce additional legislation during the 2027 General Assembly session to further regulate the technology (see CT Insider article published 8/5/2026).

Public Act 26-14, which took effect July 1, establishes Connecticut’s first comprehensive statewide framework governing the use of ALPR technology by law enforcement agencies. Among other provisions, it requires every Connecticut law enforcement agency to adopt a written policy governing the use of ALPR systems by January 1, 2027, either by using the state’s model policy or one providing equal or greater privacy protections.

The legislation represents a shift in the state’s approach to ALPR technology. Rather than focusing primarily on the equipment itself, it establishes statewide standards governing how the systems are used, how data are retained and shared, and how agencies provide public transparency and accountability.

What are ALPR systems?

ALPR systems use cameras and computer software to photograph passing vehicles and identify license plate numbers. Modern systems can also identify vehicle characteristics such as make, model, color and direction of travel, allowing law enforcement to search for vehicles associated with criminal investigations, AMBER Alerts, stolen vehicles and other public safety purposes.

Although much of the recent discussion has focused on Flock Safety, Flock is only one manufacturer of ALPR technology. Similar systems are produced by several companies, including Rekor and Motorola Solutions, and are deployed by law enforcement agencies throughout Connecticut and across the country.

As Lamont noted in his letter, the debate centers on balancing two competing interests: technology that can improve roadway safety while also collecting significant amounts of information about motorists. 

Supporters say ALPR systems have become valuable investigative tools that help recover stolen vehicles, locate missing persons and solve crimes more quickly by alerting officers when vehicles associated with active investigations are detected.

Critics argue that because the systems record information about every vehicle that passes a camera — not only those connected to criminal activity — they create large databases of vehicle movements that raise important questions about privacy, data retention, government oversight and information sharing.

Key provisions of the new law

Rather than prohibiting ALPR technology, Connecticut’s new law establishes statewide standards intended to ensure the technology operates within clear, publicly available rules. Required agency policies must address issues including:

• authorized uses of the technology;
• data retention;
• access controls;
• information sharing;
• auditing;
• officer training;
• system administration; and
• public transparency.

The legislation also places limits on certain uses of ALPR data and directs POST to develop a statewide model policy for local law enforcement agencies.

In his August 7 letter, Lamont asked POST to recommend policies agencies should have in place before deploying camera or ALPR technology, reflecting the state’s emphasis on establishing governance alongside technological capability. 

A growing public conversation

As ALPR systems have become more common, so has public interest in understanding where they are located and how they operate.

That interest has led to the creation of volunteer projects that attempt to document ALPR camera locations nationwide. One such effort, known as DeFlock, contributes information to OpenStreetMap, an open-source mapping platform, using publicly available information and field observations to identify camera locations. The project includes equipment manufactured by multiple companies — not just Flock Safety — and emphasizes that the map is community-maintained rather than an official government inventory (view DeFlock map of greater New Haven area).

The growing popularity of these mapping efforts reflects broader public interest in understanding how ALPR technology is being deployed, even as lawmakers continue refining the legal framework governing its use.

What it means for Woodbridge

The new law applies to law enforcement agencies throughout Connecticut, including those serving Woodbridge. For residents, the practical effect is that the use of ALPR technology is no longer simply a question of equipment. Connecticut now expects agencies using the technology to operate under clear, written policies defining how information is collected, retained, accessed, shared and audited, while providing greater public transparency about those practices.

Whether communities ultimately view ALPR systems as valuable public safety tools, a potential privacy concern, or some balance of the two, Connecticut’s new law and recent calls for additional guidance and oversight reflect a growing consensus that the technology should operate within a consistent framework of accountability and public transparency.