WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

SB 381

Motor Vehicles - Automated Enforcement Programs - Privacy Protections

2025 Regular Session Introduced by William Folden and 5 co-sponsors

SB 381 tightens automated traffic enforcement privacy: limits access to warrants, sets retention limits, bans biometric IDs, and restricts data sharing to adjudication or warrants.

Approved by the Governor - Chapter 463
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SB 381

SB 381 — Motor Vehicles: Automated Enforcement Programs — Privacy Protections (Chapter 463, 2025)

Status: Approved by the Governor — Chapter 463 (2025)
Introduced: January 17 / February 14, 2025 (various stages) — Enacted April–May 2025

Purpose / Intent

To strengthen privacy protections and limit non‑traffic uses of images and data produced by automated traffic‑enforcement systems (traffic cameras, speed cameras, bus‑lane cameras, school‑bus monitors, railroad crossing cameras, stop‑sign systems, noise/height monitors, work‑zone speed systems, etc.). The Act restricts public access and agency use of recorded images, mandates retention/destruction rules, operational safeguards, and bans biometric identification technologies for these systems.

Key provisions

  • Definitions: clarifies “recorded image or associated data,” “agency,” “program,” and “appropriate traffic enforcement purpose” (detection, investigation, analysis, assessment or adjudication of liability for a captured traffic violation).
  • Access/use restrictions:
    • Agencies may not access or use recorded images or associated data without a warrant, subpoena, or court order unless the access/use is for an appropriate traffic enforcement purpose.
    • Exigent circumstances and certain law‑enforcement access are authorized (subject to documentation and custodian logging requirements).
    • Employees or contractors may access images only to administer/process citations or to audit/evaluate system accuracy, and only consistent with the Act’s removal/destruction rules.
  • Custodian and inspection rules:
    • Custodians must deny general public inspection of recorded images, but must allow inspection as required under statutes (e.g., to a person issued a citation or their attorney, or agency employees for related investigations).
  • Retention and destruction:
    • Images that do not constitute evidence of a violation must be immediately removed and destroyed.
    • Images that do constitute evidence may be retained only for a limited period — the enrolled/fiscal text provides retention until the earlier of specified adjudicatory timeframes (committee/fiscal analyses describe retention until the earlier of one year after conclusion of criminal investigation/adjudication or five years after capture).
    • Before destruction, agencies may disaggregate data for non‑identifying analysis.
  • Operational safeguards and governance:
    • Agencies operating programs must adopt procedures that identify authorized employee classes, require audits, screening and training of personnel, and specify secure storage and destruction processes.
    • Recorded images must be stored in software/systems isolated from other agency networks.
    • Automated enforcement devices must be sited/focused to capture violations while minimizing identifying images of drivers, other drivers/vehicles, and pedestrians.
    • Biometric identification (including facial recognition) is prohibited.
  • Data sharing and sales:
    • Selling or otherwise transferring or sharing recorded images/data is generally prohibited except to: the person alleged liable, a court in adjudicating liability, or another law‑enforcement agency for an ongoing investigation (the latter only after that agency obtains an appropriate warrant/subpoena/court order).
    • Receiving agencies are bound by the same prohibitions/requirements.
  • Enforcement and penalties:
    • An agency that knowingly violates the access/use prohibition is subject to a fine up to $1,000 per violation.

Who is affected

  • State and local law‑enforcement agencies, the State Highway Administration, other local agencies that implement automated enforcement programs, contractors who operate or process images, and people issued citations under automated systems.
  • Members of the public seeking inspection of recorded enforcement images — access is narrowed and limited to statutorily defined circumstances.

Fiscal and procedural notes

  • Fiscal/fiscal‑note analyses indicated operational and potential fiscal impacts on state and local law‑enforcement agencies (implementation of new processes, storage and auditing controls). The Judiciary is expected to manage additional warrant/subpoena activity with existing resources. The bill includes record‑keeping and compliance tasks for custodians and agencies.
  • Effective timing: legislative actions occurred in early 2025; enacted as Chapter 463 (2025). Certain provisions account for termination dates of specific programs (e.g., stop‑sign or noise monitoring) and in committee materials the general effective date was discussed as October 1, 2025.

Practical effect

SB 381 narrows non‑enforcement uses of camera footage, tightens access and retention rules, mandates operational safeguards, and explicitly bans facial‑recognition and other biometric ID from automated traffic enforcement — balancing traffic‑safety enforcement with stronger privacy and data‑protection requirements.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.