Meeting Public Comments

Names and comments are public records. Remaining information is considered a confidential record.

Comments Submitted:

02-15-2026

Jane Robinette

Please support HF2161, regulating automated license plate readers (ALPRs). The growing use of ALPRs across Iowa and the country is concerning due to the lack of safeguards around data security, lack of a warrant requirement, and the long period of data retention. While this bill doesn't address all of the concerns, it's a great first step toward regulating an industry that is currently unaccountable and nontransparent. It's time to protect the privacy rights of all Iowans.

02-15-2026

David Anderson

Please support HF 2161. My only concern is that it doesn't go nearly far enough. In particular, most of these license plate readers are operated by out of state companies, and it's unclear whether or not this bill allows us to penalize them if they permit someone else out of state to access the records in a manner inconsistent with this legislation.

02-16-2026

Christina Crew

This bill needs to GO FARTHER. ALPR systems collect and store data on all drivers, not just those suspected of wrongdoing. This amounts to unconstitutional surveillance of all citizens. Without clear warrant requirements and strict limits on database searches and data retention, privacy is not truly being protected.

02-16-2026

Timothy Tucker [Restoring Democracy’s Promise]

Thank you, Chair and members.ALPRs are not just cameras they are networked data nodes. The real risk is not capture, but aggregation. Once plate data is stored, it can be replicated, shared, queried in bulk, or fused with other government and commercial databases.Does HF 2161 regulate only collection, or the entire data lifecycle?Specifically: Are there strict retention limits? Are bulk or suspicionless queries prohibited? Is thirdparty sharing or resale barred? Are audits mandatory and independently reviewable?If replication and crossdatabase fusion are not addressed, the bill regulates optics, not power. I urge you to ensure the statute governs aggregation, not just the camera.

02-16-2026

Sarah Chang

YES to HF 2161. ALPRs are a very intrusive level of mass surveillance on the entire population, tracking us as we go to work, school, church, even doctors. In the guise of public safety, these companies rake in profits by trampling on everyone's 4th Amendment rights. EVERYONE'S, including yours and every member of your family, including children, with no way to opt out. Third parties in other states and countries access details about vast numbers of innocent people, posing risks to public safety greater than any solutions these companies claim to offer. These huge networks of cameras have already been abused for stalking and harassment, which is hard to prevent. At the least, a warrant should be required to access the databases, data should be kept local only, and be held for the minimum time possible (e.g. one day). Though in a country that truly prioritizes freedom, this should be banned. HF 2161 is a good start on at least regulating it, which should move forward and be built upon.