Sheriff: License plate readers could save lives, but abuse would cost deputy their job

CASHMERE — Chelan County Sheriff Mike Morrison said he would fire any deputy who abused the county’s automated license plate reader system, even if doing so resulted in a fight with the union, during a wide-ranging discussion of surveillance, privacy and police accountability with the Cashmere City Council on Sept. 14.

“I would terminate them,” Morrison said after Councilmember John Perry asked directly what would happen if one of Morrison’s deputies used the system for an improper purpose. “I’d imagine that I’d probably get a grievance back from the union, and there might be a fight. But at that point, I feel if you’ve eroded our ability to do our job and erode trust in our community, I’ll make that fight.”

The exchange followed questions from Councilmember Chris Carlson, who raised concerns about documented cases elsewhere in which law enforcement officers had abused automated license plate reader systems, including using the technology to track romantic partners.

Morrison agreed such conduct was unacceptable, saying officers who abused their access should be held accountable and should not continue wearing a uniform. He said searches of the system are logged and can be reviewed by the Sheriff’s Office.

After the meeting, Morrison reiterated his position to Ward Media, quoting Sir Robert Peel, widely regarded as the father of modern policing, and said he would fire an officer who abused the technology and fight it out with the union if it pushed back.

Carlson’s questions were part of a broader debate over automated license plate readers, or ALPRs, which photograph vehicles and license plates and allow law enforcement to search collected information during investigations.

“I don’t like mass surveillance, and I believe Flock cameras are mass surveillance,” Carlson said.

Carlson and Morrison also disagreed over how Fourth Amendment privacy protections apply when information visible in public is collected across a large area and retained in a searchable system.

“I’d have a debate with you on the Fourth Amendment about right to privacy,” Carlson said.

“If it’s within a public right-of-way, you don’t have a right to privacy,” Morrison responded.

“At that moment in time,” Carlson said, drawing a distinction between an officer seeing a vehicle on the road and a network recording, retaining and collating those observations.

Despite defending ALPR technology, Morrison was considerably less enthusiastic about Flock Safety, the company providing Chelan County’s cameras.

“I can tell you right now that I’m not convinced that we keep this technology,” Morrison said.

The Sheriff’s Office is treating its use of the cameras as a trial under a two-year agreement funded by a Washington Auto Theft Prevention Authority grant. Morrison said the technology has produced positive results, but the company has been difficult to work with and insufficiently transparent about information-sharing settings.

“I can tell you one of the biggest deterrents that I have is the company itself,” Morrison said. “Just simply, I don’t like doing business with them.”

Morrison said Chelan County had not shared its information with the federal government. He said the Sheriff’s Office confronted Flock after learning that information-sharing settings elsewhere had created concerns about access to data.

“Here we are trying to establish trust and transparency with our community, and you set us up for failure right out the gate because you weren’t clear,” Morrison said. “You weren’t transparent.”

Morrison nevertheless called the underlying technology “outstanding” and pointed to a vandalism investigation in Leavenworth as an example.

Flock cameras allowed investigators to follow the vehicle of a suspect accused of damaging the city’s gazebo area as it traveled out of the region. Morrison recalled the suspect telling investigators he was turning around to surrender while the cameras showed otherwise.

“That’s weird, because I’m watching you drive through Moses Lake right now, and it doesn’t look like you’re turning around,” Morrison recalled telling the suspect. “And now I’m watching you drive into Idaho.”

Morrison also pointed to the killings of Paityn, Evelyn and Olivia Decker, saying a Wenatchee camera detected their father, Travis Decker, leaving the city, but county cameras that could have tracked where he went next were not operating.

“I can tell you right now that we would have found the Decker girls much quicker, because we would have seen them turning on the High School Road and heading down there,” Morrison said.

“Maybe the girls would still be alive,” he added.

Morrison said those examples illustrate the value of the technology for a Sheriff’s Office responsible for more than 2,900 square miles with limited staffing. He also cited its use in locating missing and endangered people, stolen vehicles and criminal suspects.

“We need some kind of help,” Morrison said. “I’m not going to hire my way out of this situation.”

The county currently has 12 cameras in rural and municipal locations, Morrison said, though several have been vandalized. He said he expects Washington lawmakers to continue considering restrictions on ALPR technology and would not be surprised if future rules require warrants for some searches.

For Morrison, the usefulness of the technology and the potential for its abuse were not mutually exclusive. He defended keeping ALPRs available to investigators while telling council members that misuse by one of his own deputies would cross a line.

“If you’ve eroded our ability to do our job and erode trust in our community,” Morrison said, “I’ll make that fight.”

Andrew Simpson: 509-433-7626 or andrew@ward.media