Agenda - Council - 09/22/2026 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

cameras would not perform license -plate reading but could move and zoom and could use parameters to notify officers of certain circumstances, such as an unusually large group in a park after established hours. Councilmember Buscher asked about auditing and recalled hearing that an independent third - party audit was required. Sheriff Wise confirmed that third -party auditing was required. He explained that Flock Safety also provided automated monitoring between formal audits to identify unusual or repetitive searches that might warrant supervisory review. Chief Bluml added that Ramsey was approaching its required audit cycle and intended to conduct the ALPR audit at approximately the same time as its body -camera audit, using the same auditing company. Councilmember Buscher commented that some residents' concern was not necessarily that the cameras currently issued speeding tickets but that the infrastructure might eventually be used for additional purposes if state law changed. She recognized that such a change would be a legislative matter rather than a decision the Sheriff would make. Sheriff Wise agreed that future technological capabilities could not be predicted. He believed the realistic policy question was how government regulated technology rather than whether technological development itself could be stopped. He anticipated elected officials would repeatedly face the same fundamental question as new capabilities emerged: whether a particular public -safety benefit justified the associated privacy tradeoff. In his assessment, the current ALPR system provided sufficient safeguards to make the tradeoff reasonable. Councilmember Buscher asked whether officers viewed ALPR images only after an authorized search or a hot -file alert, rather than continuously. Sheriff Wise confirmed officers could not simply browse ALPR images without a legitimate purpose. He explained that his agency's system required a police case number before officers could complete a search, creating another safeguard against casual or unauthorized searches. Councilmember Buscher asked whether officers remained responsible for evaluating a potential ALPR match rather than automatically assuming the system had correctly identified a suspect vehicle. Sheriff Wise confirmed that officers remained responsible for making that determination. He discussed reports of erroneous ALPR matches and emphasized that law -enforcement technology was not infallible. Officers were trained to evaluate the circumstances, verify information, and use their own observations and judgment before taking enforcement action. He contrasted the technology with earlier policing practices, when officers investigating a crime involving a vaguely described vehicle might stop numerous vehicles simply because they generally matched the description. He believed modern technology substantially reduced those errors but did not eliminate the need for human judgment and accountability. City Council Work Session / September 8, 2026 Page 3 of 8