Under advisement from February 24, 2026 (Item No. 8): Receive report from the Office of Correction and Law Enforcement Monitoring relating to the audit of Office of the Sheriff compliance with the Surveillance Use Policy for Automated License Plate Readers.

This document is a report from the Office of Correction and Law Enforcement Monitoring (OCLEM) regarding an audit of the Sheriff's Office's compliance with the Automated License Plate Readers (ALPR) Surveillance Use Policy. It serves as the first four-month update following a directive from the Board of Supervisors. The report indicates that the Sheriff's Office is not currently operating an ALPR system but has accessed ALPR data from other law enforcement agencies. The report found no evidence of data sharing with out-of-state or federal agencies. The recommended action has no fiscal, child, senior, or sustainability implications.

Key points

• Report from OCLEM on Sheriff's Office compliance with ALPR SUP.
• First four-month update following Board's directive from February 24, 2026.
• Sheriff's Office is not operating its own ALPR system but accessed data from other agencies.
• No evidence of data sharing with out-of-state or federal agencies.
• Recommended action has no fiscal, child, senior, or sustainability implications.

Generated for convenience from extracted text using AI. Review the official source document before relying on this summary.

The source text indicates this attachment appears to be a draft document.

This report from the Office of Correction and Law Enforcement Monitoring (OCLEM) provides an update on the Sheriff’s Office's compliance with the Automated License Plate Readers (ALPR) Surveillance Use Policy (SUP) following the Board's directive from February 24, 2026. The Sheriff’s Office has ceased operating ALPR systems for contract cities and is currently unable to access ALPR data due to Flock Safety's suspension of access. The audit of the Sheriff’s Office's ALPR search activity revealed that most searches were for legitimate law enforcement purposes, but there were issues with documentation and compliance among personnel. The report highlights the need for updated policies and training to improve data entry practices and oversight.

Key points

• The report is OCLEM's first update following the Board's February 24, 2026 directive regarding ALPR compliance.
• The Sheriff’s Office no longer operates ALPR systems for contract cities and cannot access ALPR data due to Flock Safety's suspension.
• An audit of ALPR search activity showed that most searches were for legitimate purposes, but many lacked proper documentation.
• There is a need for updated policies and training to ensure compliance and improve transparency in ALPR data usage.

Limitations

• The document appears to be a draft as it contains incomplete sections and references to ongoing policy development.
• There are unresolved placeholders and missing information regarding specific directives and policies.

Generated for convenience from extracted text using AI. Review the official source document before relying on this summary.

The source text indicates this attachment appears to be a draft document.

Josh Williams, a resident of Saratoga, urges the Santa Clara County Supervisors to permanently end the use of Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs) due to documented failures and privacy concerns. He highlights issues such as misuse of data, lack of proper documentation in searches, and the potential for mass surveillance. Williams calls for stronger regulations, including requiring judicial warrants for data searches and prohibiting the integration of facial recognition technology with ALPR systems. He emphasizes the need to protect civil liberties and privacy rights.

Key points

• Josh Williams opposes the use of ALPRs in Santa Clara County.
• He cites documented failures of ALPR systems and their potential for mass surveillance.
• Williams requests the implementation of stronger regulations, including judicial warrants for data searches.
• He raises concerns about misuse of data by law enforcement and improper access by agencies like ICE.
• The letter discusses specific issues from an audit by OCLEM, including training failures and lack of proper documentation in searches.
• Williams advocates for the prohibition of ALPR systems that integrate facial recognition and biometric analysis technologies.

Limitations

• The text appears to be a draft as it includes formatting artifacts and incomplete sections.
• There are unresolved placeholders and missing information regarding specific dates and details of the audit.

Generated for convenience from extracted text using AI. Review the official source document before relying on this summary.

This document contains public comments opposing the use of Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs) in Santa Clara County. Multiple residents express concerns about the failures and risks associated with ALPRs, including potential violations of privacy and civil rights. They urge the county to end the use of ALPRs or, at a minimum, implement strict safeguards such as requiring judicial warrants for data searches and prohibiting data sharing with immigration authorities. The comments highlight the negative impact of mass surveillance on vulnerable populations and emphasize the need for accountability and transparency in the use of surveillance technology.

Key points

• Residents urge Santa Clara County to permanently end the use of ALPRs.
• Concerns raised about the failures of ALPR systems and their impact on privacy and civil rights.
• Call for strict guardrails, including requiring judicial warrants for data searches.
• Opposition to sharing ALPR data with immigration authorities.
• Highlighting the disproportionate impact of surveillance on vulnerable populations, including racial minorities and LGBTQ+ teens.
• Residents reference data breaches and policy violations in other Bay Area cities as evidence of risks associated with ALPRs.

Limitations

• The text contains multiple public comments but lacks specific details about the context or decisions being made by the Board of Supervisors.
• Some placeholders and formatting elements are present, indicating potential extraction issues.

Generated for convenience from extracted text using AI. Review the official source document before relying on this summary.