MORGANTOWN — A state delegate said he plans to introduce legislation in the next West Virginia Legislative Session to impose limits on security cameras and their automated license-plate readers, part of a growing debate about privacy, policing and public oversight.
Del. Evan Hansen, D-Monongalia, told reporters he will draft a measure that would create formal "guardrails" on how automated license-plate readers — often abbreviated ALPRs — are used by law enforcement agencies across the state. The topic has surfaced in recent weeks as residents and officials weigh the technologies’ benefits for crime fighting against risks to civil liberties.
What Hansen wants
Hansen said the bill will require agencies that operate ALPR systems to adopt written policies limiting collection, use and retention of plate-read data. Those constraints would include time limits for how long data can be kept and specific rules governing when the systems can be used to track people, including during searches for suspects involved in active warrants or during Silver or Amber Alerts.
"Every West Virginian has certain constitutional rights, but at the same time, I also recognize the need for law enforcement to have tools they could use to solve crimes,"
Hansen said. "So I'm focusing my efforts on drafting a bill to put strong guardrails in place on the use of these license plate readers."
The proposed restrictions are aimed at addressing complaints that some camera networks and their analytics can enable near-constant, real-time monitoring that may implicate Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable searches.
Framing from both sides
Support for limits has surfaced across the political spectrum. Sen. Chris Rose, R-Monongalia, told MetroNews the conservative Freedom Caucus plans separate legislation to prohibit warrantless, real-time surveillance technologies, a list Rose described as including ALPRs, facial recognition, drone surveillance and other mass-tracking tools.
"While we're very pro-law enforcement and very much pro-law and order ... we also want to make sure the Fourth Amendment is protected and respected and not violated,"
Rose said.
Both lawmakers framed their efforts as balancing acts: preserving law-enforcement ability to investigate and solve crimes while preventing technologies from becoming instruments of unchecked surveillance.
Practical elements likely in play
Based on comments from Hansen and Rose, elements likely to appear in upcoming proposals include:
- Mandated written policies for any agency using ALPRs, describing permitted uses.
- Data-retention limits to prevent indefinite storage of location records tied to plate reads.
- Restrictions on real-time tracking without a warrant, with limited exceptions such as active Amber or Silver Alerts.
Advocates for privacy point out that license-plate readers collect location data that, over time, can map a person’s movements. Law-enforcement officials argue the systems help recover stolen vehicles, locate endangered people and investigate serious crimes.
What this means locally
In Monongalia County and towns like Morgantown, where university and commuter traffic concentrate license-plate views, the debate is not theoretical. Residents and local officials will want clarity on when and how their movements can be captured and stored. The measures lawmakers plan to bring forward could standardize rules across municipalities and sheriff’s offices that now operate under a patchwork of policies.
Any bill that advances will likely prompt input from a range of stakeholders: county sheriffs, municipal police departments, civil-rights groups and technology vendors that sell ALPR systems. County and city governments may need to revise local policies to comply if the Legislature adopts statewide standards.
Next steps
Hansen is currently drafting the text and has indicated he will file the bill for consideration in the Legislature’s next regular session. Lawmakers from both parties have signaled a faster-than-usual appetite to address the subject after recent public comment and media attention.
| Item | Likely provision |
|---|---|
| Policy requirement | Agencies must adopt and follow written policies |
| Retention limits | Set timelines for deletion of collected data |
| Real-time surveillance | Prohibit warrantless tracking, with narrow exceptions |
As the session approaches, the details of any bill — the exact retention periods, oversight mechanisms and enforcement penalties — will determine the scope of change. For residents who worry about privacy and for officers who rely on technology to investigate crime, the coming months will be a time to make those concerns heard at the Statehouse.
Coverage will continue as lawmakers file measures and committees convene to vet them. Public hearings are likely, offering a forum where citizens and officials can weigh the trade-offs and shape policy that will affect how West Virginians are seen on the roadways.
