A Surveillance Debate Meets A Legal Deadline In Redwood City

REDWOOD CITY, CA — A legal deadline shaped Redwood City’s debate over surveillance at its early October City Council meeting as the Council voted 5–1 to approve the city’s response to a San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury report on automated license plate readers.

The city said state law required a response by Nov. 2. Councilmember Chris Sturken opposed the motion; Councilmember Marcella Padilla was absent.

Police Chief Kristina Bell said the city agreed with all of the report’s findings and recommendations. She described updates to Police Department Policy 427, including written criteria for approving, reviewing and ending data-sharing relationships.

The city had ended ALPR data sharing with Stanford University in April 2026, published annual audit reports, and restricted sharing with outside agencies while it aligned its practices with the updated policy. Bell said ALPR data continued to be deleted after 30 days.

“I think the report has answered well on things that have been implemented already, and you're recognizing that the grand jury is correct in almost every section, and that the city is committed to making the things correct and doing it correctly,” said Councilmember Diane Howard.

Residents who spoke urged the city to delay its response and adopt stronger protections in any future vendor contract.

Sturken said, “I understand it is a template response, but there could be additional feedback that we just haven't heard yet.”

A motion to continue the item to a later meeting did not receive a second.

Councilmember Jeff Gee supported approval while emphasizing that the broader discussion would continue.

“I think what we need to do is approve and then continue the community dialog, and then see what comes out of it,” he said.

Officials clarified that approval of the response letter did not decide whether the city would continue using ALPRs or what terms might appear in a future contract.