Austin adopts TRUST Act as Texas cities split on license plate readers

Central Texas city leaders are establishing new laws, rules and policies to guide the implementation and procurement of emerging surveillance technologies, with some embracing the upgrades while other debate scaling back investments.  

Recently, the Austin City Council passed new rules for how it will procure and use surveillance technology such as automated license plate readers (ALPRs), drones and other information-collecting tools. 

The city council passed the Transparent and Responsible Use of Surveillance Technology Act (TRUST Act), on April 23. The ordinance requires city departments to get council approval before buying, accepting funding for or using many types of surveillance technology. It also applies when a department wants to use existing technology in a new way or share surveillance data with another agency. 

Before council members vote on a surveillance technology proposal, city staff must prepare a privacy review. The review must explain how the technology works, what information it collects, who can see the data, how long it will be kept and what privacy safeguards will be in place. Staff must also prepare a use policy explaining how the technology would be used and what limits would apply. 

The TRUST Act does not ban all surveillance technology. Instead, it creates a public review process before the city can move forward with many surveillance tools. It also requires annual reports on the systems the city uses, how much they cost, how they are used and whether any rules were broken. 

The new rules follow months of debate over Austin’s use of ALPRs. Austin previously tested Flock Safety cameras, but the program drew criticism from privacy advocates who raised concerns about how the data was shared and whether privacy rules were being followed. The city will allow its Flock contract to expire in June. 

Austin’s decision comes as cities and states across the country are handling ALPRs and other surveillance tools in different ways. Supporters say the cameras help police find stolen vehicles, locate suspects, and solve crimes. Critics say the systems can track where people go, create large databases of personal information, and allow data to be shared more widely than residents may expect. 

Privacy advocates have raised concerns that police departments and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) could use ALPR data for immigration enforcement. Those concerns have grown as Texas county sheriffs face a state requirement to request or enter into agreements with ICE by Dec.1, allowing some state and local law enforcement agencies to carry out certain immigration enforcement duties. The Texas Department of Public Safety also has expanded its use of AI-powered surveillance tools and entered into a $26 million contract with a private company last year. 

One of the main companies selling ALPR systems to police departments says local agencies decide who can access the data and how it is used. The company has said it is adding tools that would let agencies require a case number before officers search the system and flag unusual activity for review.  

This private firm has sold nearly 92,000 cameras to local police departments nationwide, including more than 10,000 in Texas, according to DeFlock, an open-source project that crowdsources and maps automated license plate reader locations. 

Local policies vary widely. 

Fair Oaks Ranch is preparing to start using a license plate reader system in August. For now, only Fair Oaks Ranch officers will have access to the data. That approach allows the city to use the technology while limiting outside access at the beginning of the program. 

The San Antonio Police Department does not directly operate a license plate reader system. However, the department can access CENTRO’s downtown camera system through a pilot program, showing how police may use camera data even when another entity manages the technology. 

Universal City has placed limits on data sharing. The city allows license plate reader data to be shared only with other agencies in Texas and one county near Oklahoma City. The department also bans the use of license plate readers for immigration enforcement. 

San Marcos has changed its data-sharing rules after debate over its Flock Safety cameras. As of June 9, 2025, the San Marcos Police Department no longer automatically shares license plate reader data with other law enforcement agencies. Outside agencies must now request the data, show that it is tied to a specific criminal investigation or prosecution and sign a nondisclosure agreement. 

The city has also limited the expansion of its camera system. The San Marcos City Council voted against placing 19 additional cameras throughout the city, leaving its original 14 cameras in place. The additional cameras, which had already been bought with grant funding, will instead be placed along roads leading in and out of the city. 

The city of Kyle has taken a different path. On April 21, council members voted to allow the Kyle Police Department to apply for a state grant worth up to $381,200 to continue funding at least 38 existing Flock Safety cameras. Kyle has used Flock cameras since 2024. 

According to notes on Kyle’s policy, the city does not require an officer to have reasonable suspicion or probable cause before searching the city’s Flock data. 

The different approaches show how unsettled the debate remains in Texas. Some cities are ending or limiting ALPR programs. Others are keeping them in place, adding internal rules or using grant money to expand them. 

State lawmakers have started to look at broader questions around artificial intelligence and surveillance.  

Last session, Texas passed the Texas Responsible Artificial Intelligence Governance Act, which created an AI Advisory Council to review how state agencies use AI-powered tools. Bills that would have regulated police use of license plate readers did not advance. 

The future of ALPRs remains unsettled as Texas cities take different approaches to the technology. In Austin, future decisions about surveillance technology will have to happen in public, with city officials required to explain what tools they want, how the data will be used and what protections are in place. As Texas cities continue to take different approaches, Austin’s TRUST Act sets up one of the state’s clearest tests of surveillance oversight. 

Photo by Tony Webster, CC BY 2.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0>, from Wikimedia Commons