Tuesday\u2019s vote has set up a showdown between the technology\u2019s critics \u2014 who warn it can be used to track law-abiding residents and target immigrants \u2014 and its supporters, who argue the cameras, first introduced in 2022, have become an invaluable investigative tool for San Jose\u2019s chronically short-staffed police force<\/a>.<\/p>\n SJPD officials, who authored the proposed safeguards, maintain the reform package addresses critics\u2019 concerns over privacy. Mayor Matt Mahan also applauded the proposal.<\/p>\n \u201cWe have a responsibility to ensure the technology we use to support our police department are held to the same high standard as our officers,\u201d Mahan told San Jos\u00e9 Spotlight through a spokesperson. \u201cI applaud (Police Chief Paul Joseph) for putting forward safeguards that ensure we can continue to leverage this technology responsibly and for its intended purpose \u2014 keeping San Joseans safe.\u201d<\/p>\n An SJPD spokesperson declined to provide further comment.<\/p>\n Among the proposed changes, the measure would reduce the default retention period of license plate reader data from one year to 30 days. It would also prohibit the placement of cameras outside abortion clinics and places of worship.<\/p>\n In addition, the new rules would place firmer controls on access to the data by requiring partner law enforcement agencies to provide additional \u201ccompliance documentation\u201d explaining the purpose behind their data requests.<\/p>\n Under the city\u2019s current policy, partner agencies<\/a> requesting data access must provide a \u201clegitimate law enforcement purpose,\u201d though they do not need a warrant. San Jose already prohibits use of the database for investigating a person\u2019s immigration status or for monitoring legally protected activities like protests or rallies.<\/p>\n The surveillance technology has come under increasing scrutiny in recent months. In November, a coalition of local advocacy groups sued San Jose<\/a>, alleging the city\u2019s practice of allowing warrantless searches of its license plate data violates drivers\u2019 privacy rights.<\/p>\n Nick Hidalgo, a staff attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California, one of the groups involved in the lawsuit, said he is \u201cencouraged\u201d by Tuesday\u2019s proposal, though he contends the added safeguards still fall short. Hidalgo argues the city must only allow searches of its database when the requesting agency provides a probable cause warrant.<\/p>\n \u201cOtherwise, it\u2019s a violation of our California constitutional right to privacy and to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures,\u201d he told San Jos\u00e9 Spotlight.<\/p>\n Earlier this year, three South Bay jurisdictions \u2014 Santa Clara County, Los Altos Hills and Mountain View \u2014 terminated their contracts with Flock Safety, amid concerns<\/a> the company has allowed transfers of license plate reader data to out-of-state law enforcement agencies, a practice that is barred by state law.<\/p>\n Flock Safety spokesperson Paris Lewbel said the company\u2019s customers are able to control who accesses their data.<\/p>\n \u201cFlock provides transparent tools, compliant with California law, that help solve serious crimes and find missing people while protecting civil liberties, and we welcome continued discussion with city leaders,\u201d Lewbel told San Jos\u00e9 Spotlight.<\/p>\n Six councilmembers \u2014 Domingo Candelas, Pamela Campos, David Cohen, Michael Mulcahy, George Casey and Peter Ortiz \u2014 are backing a proposal<\/a> that includes additional safeguards beyond those outlined in SJPD\u2019s memo. For example, one of the measures would also restrict placing automated cameras nearby consulate offices, a precaution backers say would protect the privacy of those handling immigration matters.<\/p>\n \u201cStrong guardrails and transparency are essential to protecting civil liberties and maintaining public trust,\u201d Candelas told San Jos\u00e9 Spotlight. \u201cBy putting the right safeguards in place, we can support our officers while ensuring this technology is used responsibly and with appropriate oversight.\u201d<\/p>\n Ortiz has also submitted his own memo<\/a>, in which he raised the possibility of the city cutting ties with Flock Safety. Citing concerns about the firm\u2019s handling of sensitive data, Ortiz\u00a0 suggested the city should \u201cexplore alternative vendors\u201d for providing automated license plate reader services. He did not respond to a request for comment.<\/p>\n Tuesday\u2019s vote has raised questions about a potential conflict of interest for Mahan, given that one of his major campaign donors<\/a>, Y Combinator CEO Garry Tan, was also among Flock Safety\u2019s earliest investors<\/a>. However, the mayor is expected to participate in the vote due to a finding from the city attorney that doing so would not violate state campaign finance laws.<\/p>\n![\"In-line](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/interactive-321838904008.png\")
<\/a><\/p>\n