SIGNALDATAAccountability. For the People. Preview
License-plate readers · San Diego County

San Diego County

Using license-plate readers · 7 agencies documented

← Statewide map
Alameda CountyAlpine CountyAmador CountyButte CountyCalaveras CountyColusa CountyContra Costa CountyDel Norte CountyEl Dorado CountyFresno CountyGlenn CountyHumboldt CountyImperial CountyInyo CountyKern CountyKings CountyLake CountyLassen CountyLos Angeles CountyMadera CountyMarin CountyMariposa CountyMendocino CountyMerced CountyModoc CountyMono CountyMonterey CountyNapa CountyNevada CountyOrange CountyPlacer CountyPlumas CountyRiverside CountySacramento CountySan Benito CountySan Bernardino CountySan Diego CountySan Francisco CountySan Joaquin CountySan Luis Obispo CountySan Mateo CountySanta Barbara CountySanta Clara CountySanta Cruz CountyShasta CountySierra CountySiskiyou CountySolano CountySonoma CountyStanislaus CountySutter CountyTehama CountyTrinity CountyTulare CountyTuolumne CountyVentura CountyYolo CountyYuba County

San Diego Police Department

Status
Using license-plate readers
Vendors
Flock Safety
Cameras
Count not documented
Impact report proposed 500 Smart Streetlight/ALPR units initially; no current installed count read from the city map.
Contract
Flock Safety: $2,000,000 per year (per 500 units) · approved by San Diego City Council · Impact report gives about $4,000 per unit per year plus $1,500,000 one-time installation, five-year proposed contract. Kurrant reported the Flock contract at about $2 million per year. (San Diego Police Department, date not shown; Kurrant, June 4, 2026)
Data sharing
Policy modified after the Dec. 9, 2025 council action limits sharing to California law enforcement, the city and district attorneys, or court order; bars sharing with ICE, Border Patrol, out-of-state or federal agencies and federal task forces; 30-day purge (ca1-sdpd-policy).
  1. Feb. 2025 SDPD's annual surveillance report disclosed sharing plate data with outside agencies including ICE and Border Patrol, as reported by CalMatters/The Markup. (The Markup / CalMatters, June 18, 2025)
  2. Dec. 9, 2025 City Council action led to a second modified ALPR use policy with a 30-day retention limit and an explicit ban on sharing with federal task forces. (San Diego Police Department, Dec. 9, 2025; City of San Diego / San Diego Police Department, date not shown)
  3. 2026 SDPD posts monthly redacted search logs (network audits) for 2024 through September 2026 on its technology page. (City of San Diego / San Diego Police Department, date not shown; San Diego Police Department, 2026)
Conflicts and open questions
  • City documents opened do not name the vendor; Flock is attributed from Kurrant (citing Axios) and the audit file format. Verify vendor and contract from council records.
  • Kurrant is a news-desk publication without a byline.

From agency records.

San Diego County Sheriff's Office

Status
Using license-plate readers
Vendors
Flock Safety
Data sharing
Kurrant reported one-year retention for sheriff plate data.
  1. May 14, 2024 San Marcos staff recommended joining the sheriff's Safe San Marcos program and approving sheriff-placed plate-reader cameras; the report said Lemon Grove, Santee and Poway had similar programs. (City of San Marcos (Legistar), May 14, 2024)
  2. June 18, 2025 CalMatters/The Markup reported the department ran searches for CBP or Border Patrol; it said the matter needed further internal review. (The Markup / CalMatters, June 18, 2025)
  3. June 3, 2026 Imperial Beach's council voted unanimously for a two-month sheriff pilot with four Flock plate readers, half the eight the sheriff recommended. (Kurrant, June 4, 2026)
Conflicts and open questions
  • No sheriff contract or camera count found in county records (sdcounty Legistar title search found no ALPR items 2022 and later).

Reported by news outlets; agency records not yet obtained.

El Cajon Police Department

Status
Using license-plate readers
Vendors
Flock Safety, Motorola Solutions
Cameras
Count not documented
No count found; NBC 7 reported the system captured more than 682,000 vehicles in 30 days.
  1. 2022 inewsource reported El Cajon used Vigilant Solutions in 2022; the AG's lawsuit says it now uses Flock. (inewsource, Dec. 10, 2025)
  2. Aug. 2025 KPBS reported the department continued sharing with out-of-state agencies; Chief Jeremiah Larson said it believed it was compliant. (KPBS, Oct. 3, 2025)
  3. Oct. 3, 2025 The Attorney General sued the city, the department and the chief over out-of-state sharing. Mayor Bill Wells called the suit 'political retaliation against a conservative city.' (California Office of the Attorney General, Oct. 3, 2025; ABC 10News San Diego (City News Service), Oct. 6, 2025)
  4. Jan. 2026 The AG moved for a court order; Wells said the city would keep sharing unless a judge ordered otherwise. Hearing set Feb. 13, 2026; outcome not found. (California Office of the Attorney General, Jan. 21, 2026; NBC 7 San Diego, Jan. 22, 2026; NBC 7 San Diego, Feb. 8, 2026)
Conflicts and open questions
  • El Cajon is under 100,000 population; included because of the AG case.
  • Motorola listed for the 2022 Vigilant system; whether any Vigilant equipment remains is not known.
  • Filing date of AG motion: OAG release dated Jan. 21, 2026; NBC 7 and 10News say filed Thursday Jan. 22.

From agency records.

Chula Vista Police Department

Status
Program documented, current use unconfirmed
Vendors
Motorola Solutions
  1. April 20, 2021 City Council reauthorized the department's Vigilant/Motorola ALPR program for one year, calling for listening sessions and a study of an oversight group. (City of Chula Vista (Legistar), April 20, 2021)
Conflicts and open questions
  • No 2022-2026 ALPR items found in Chula Vista Legistar title search; current vendor and use not confirmed.

From agency records.

Oceanside Police Department

Status
Using license-plate readers
Vendors
Flock Safety
Cameras
18
18 Flock cameras at nine intersections, per inewsource, Sept. 3, 2026.
Contract
Flock Safety: $30,000 per year (maintenance, approximate) · from 2021 · approved by Oceanside City Council Sept. 2026 · Council voted 4-1 (Deputy Mayor Eric Joyce opposed) to spend $30,000 of a $57,000 federal JAG grant on Flock maintenance. The contract dates to 2021 and renews yearly. (inewsource, Sept. 3, 2026)
  1. Sept. 2026 City council voted 4-1 to use $30,000 of a federal Justice Assistance Grant for Flock camera maintenance; Deputy Mayor Eric Joyce voted no. Six public speakers opposed. (inewsource, Sept. 3, 2026)
Conflicts and open questions
  • inewsource (Sept. 3, 2026) dates the vote to "Wednesday" (likely Sept. 2, 2026); confirm from council minutes.
  • The contract itself was not in the meeting materials, per inewsource.

Reported by news outlets; agency records not yet obtained.

Escondido Police Department

Status
Program documented, current use unconfirmed
Vendors
Motorola Solutions
  1. Feb. 2020 In survey answers published by the State Auditor, the department said it operated ALPR cameras and accessed data through Vigilant Solutions, keeping data one to two years. (California State Auditor, Feb. 13, 2020)
  2. Dec. 10, 2025 Listed in the Oxnard Police Department's 2024–2025 ALPR data sharing review among California agencies with access to Oxnard's ALPR detections through Vigilant. (Oxnard Police Department, Dec. 10, 2025)
Conflicts and open questions
  • No current contract or count found.

From agency records.

Carlsbad Police Department

Status
Program documented, current use unconfirmed
Vendors
Motorola Solutions
Cameras
158
158 cameras at key intersections before a council-approved upgrade, per NBC 7, May 23, 2022.
  1. Feb. 2020 In survey answers published by the State Auditor, the department said it operated ALPR cameras and accessed data through Vigilant Solutions. (California State Auditor, Feb. 13, 2020)
  2. May 2022 City council approved replacing 85 existing cameras and adding 43, with new readers at 15 intersections on city borders, per NBC 7. (NBC 7 San Diego, May 23, 2022)
  3. Dec. 10, 2025 Listed in the Oxnard Police Department's 2024–2025 ALPR data sharing review among California agencies with access to Oxnard's ALPR detections through Vigilant. (Oxnard Police Department, Dec. 10, 2025)
Conflicts and open questions
  • A 2026 request for proposals for a new plate-reader system has been listed by procurement aggregators; not yet confirmed from the city's own records. Award not found.
  • Vendor of the 2022 replacement cameras not named in the NBC 7 text read.

Reported by news outlets; agency records not yet obtained.

Statewide

  1. Jan. 1, 2016 SB 34 (Statutes of 2015, Chapter 532), codified at Civil Code section 1798.90.5 and following, took effect. It requires ALPR operators and end users to keep a usage and privacy policy, log access, and share ALPR information only with public agencies. The Attorney General reads 'public agency' to exclude out-of-state and federal agencies. (California Department of Justice, Office of the Attorney General, Oct. 27, 2023)
  2. Feb. 13, 2020 The California State Auditor released report 2019-118 on the Fresno Police Department, LAPD, Marin County Sheriff's Office and Sacramento County Sheriff's Office. It found none of the four audited staff searches of ALPR images, three of the four shared images without first checking the recipient's right and need to know, and 70 percent of surveyed agencies ran or planned to run ALPR. It recommended a state model policy and a maximum retention period set in law. (California State Auditor, Feb. 13, 2020)
  3. Oct. 27, 2023 The Attorney General's Division of Law Enforcement issued Information Bulletin 2023-DLE-06, telling state and local agencies that SB 34 bars sharing ALPR information with out-of-state and federal agencies, with model policy guidance. (California Department of Justice, Office of the Attorney General, Oct. 27, 2023; California Office of the Attorney General, Oct. 3, 2025)
  4. April 2, 2024 Gov. Gavin Newsom announced a California Highway Patrol contract with Flock Safety for about 480 cameras: about 290 on Oakland surface streets and 190 on East Bay state highways, with a 28-day retention period. (Office of Governor Gavin Newsom, April 2, 2024)
  5. June 18, 2025 CalMatters and The Markup reported, from a search log obtained by Oakland Privacy covering April 28 to May 30, 2025, that 10 agencies, nine in Southern California and six in Los Angeles County, ran searches for ICE, including LAPD; the Orange and San Diego County sheriffs ran searches for Border Patrol. Riverside County logged four 'hsinvest' searches but said they were narcotics cases. (The Markup / CalMatters, June 18, 2025)
  6. Oct. 2025 Gov. Newsom vetoed SB 274, which would have required deletion of some ALPR data after 60 days, officer training, documented case reasons for searches and random Department of Justice audits. His veto message said the 60-day limit could impede investigations, particularly cold cases. (CalMatters, Oct. 3, 2025)
  7. Oct. 3, 2025 Attorney General Rob Bonta filed a petition for a writ of mandate in San Diego County Superior Court against the City of El Cajon, its police department and Chief Jeremiah Larson, alleging the department shared ALPR data with agencies in 26 other states in violation of SB 34. The AG's office said it had contacted 18 agencies about possible violations since 2024. (California Office of the Attorney General, Oct. 3, 2025; CalMatters, Oct. 3, 2025)
  8. Nov. 24, 2025 CHP Commissioner Sean Duryee wrote to Flock Safety CEO Garrett Langley that data from CHP's Flock cameras may not be shared with federal officials, citing the contract's bar on sharing outside California. (KTVU FOX 2, Nov. 24, 2025)
  9. Jan. 2026 The Attorney General filed a motion in California v. City of El Cajon asking the court to order the city to stop sharing ALPR data with out-of-state agencies; the AG said the data reached more than 100 agencies outside California. A hearing was set for Feb. 13, 2026. No ruling was found in sources checked as of Oct. 17, 2026. (California Office of the Attorney General, Jan. 21, 2026; NBC 7 San Diego, Jan. 22, 2026; NBC 7 San Diego, Feb. 8, 2026)
  10. Aug. 31, 2026 SB 1013 (Cervantes), similar to the vetoed SB 274, passed the Senate but did not receive an Assembly floor vote before the session ended; CalMatters reported Assembly Majority Leader Cecilia Aguiar-Curry held it. CalMatters counted this as the fifth straight year without new ALPR rules; nearly 40 law enforcement agencies and unions opposed the bill. (CalMatters (republished by LAist), Sept. 3, 2026; CalMatters Digital Democracy, date not shown)
  11. Oct. 2026 A Santa Clara County Superior Court judge dismissed a challenge to San Jose's ALPR network, rejecting claims that warrantless searches of ALPR data violate the state constitution's privacy and search provisions (outside this researcher's counties; recorded as statewide legal context). (San Jose Spotlight (republished by Local News Matters), Oct. 7, 2026)

State agencies

California Highway Patrol

Status
Using license-plate readers
Vendors
Flock Safety, Vendor not named in source
Cameras
Count not documented
No statewide count found. The 2024 East Bay contract covers about 480 Flock cameras (about 290 Oakland streets, 190 East Bay highways); CHP also runs mobile ALPR on patrol vehicles under General Order 81.1.
Data sharing
CHP's contract with Flock bars sharing with the federal government or any entity outside California, per the commissioner's Nov. 2025 letter (ca1-ktvu-chp-letter). Vehicle Code 2413 bars making data available to non-law-enforcement agencies or individuals.
  1. Oct. 2020 General Order 81.1 (revised October 2020) sets CHP's ALPR rules: mobile ALPR data is kept 60 days and then purged, access is limited to personnel with an investigative need, and ALPR use is reported each year in the auto theft report to the Legislature. (California Highway Patrol, Oct. 2020)
  2. Oct. 2020 Vehicle Code 2413 limits CHP retention of plate-reader data to 60 days except for evidence or felony investigations, bars selling the data, and limits its use to locating vehicles or people suspected in a public offense. (California Legislature (via california.public.law), date not shown)
  3. Feb. 8, 2024 The Oaklandside reported CHP would run Oakland's 300-camera Flock network funded by a $1.2 million state loan; CHP keeps data 60 days while Oakland and Flock agreed to 30. (The Oaklandside, Feb. 8, 2024)
  4. April 2, 2024 The governor's office announced the CHP-Flock contract for about 480 cameras in Oakland and the East Bay with 28-day retention. (Office of Governor Gavin Newsom, April 2, 2024)
  5. Nov. 24, 2025 The CHP commissioner told Flock in writing that CHP camera data cannot be shared with federal officials. (KTVU FOX 2, Nov. 24, 2025)
Conflicts and open questions
  • Retention differs by source: 60 days (GO 81.1, mobile ALPR; Vehicle Code 2413 cap), 28 days (governor's release on the East Bay Flock network), 60 days (Oaklandside on CHP practice). These may describe different systems.
  • No CHP Flock deployment in the ten southern counties was found; not checked through CHP contract records (searches exhausted).

From agency records.