A new, powerful Citizen Portal experience is ready. Switch now

Committee refers New Bedford ordinance on license-plate readers and surveillance to full City Council after hours of debate

September 08, 2026 | New Bedford City, Bristol County, Massachusetts


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Committee refers New Bedford ordinance on license-plate readers and surveillance to full City Council after hours of debate
The New Bedford City Council Committee on Ordinances voted 8–3 on Sept. 8 to refer to the full Council a proposed ordinance that would either eliminate automated license-plate readers (ALPRs) or require strict privacy, transparency and audit rules before municipal agencies can deploy them. Chair Shane Burgo said the measure strikes "a balance between canceling out existing ALPR contracts" and setting guidelines for any future contracts.

Attorney David Geratowski told the committee the lawfulness of local restrictions may depend on future state legislation, noting that whether a state law would preempt local rules or allow municipalities to be more restrictive “depends on what the state law says.” Chief of Police Jason Thode testified the system is currently suspended and recommended retention periods between seven and 14 days, restricted operational access, monthly internal audits by Professional Standards, and narrative justifications for each search. “My proposal … was monthly,” Thode said of audits.

Councillors debated multiple amendments, including a proposal to broaden the ordinance’s definition of surveillance technology to cover facial recognition, drones, gunshot-detection and social-media monitoring. That amendment failed on a 10–1 roll call. Councillor Joe Lopes proposed a series of stricter measures (including a seven-day retention standard and limiting searches to sergeants and above) that failed or did not receive seconding votes. Councillor Sean Oliver’s attempt to set a 14-day retention period also failed.

After the roll-call vote to refer the ordinance to the full City Council, Councillor Ryan Perera said the item will appear on the Sept. 24 agenda and stressed there will be further opportunities for amendments and public input before adoption. The referral vote was 8 in favor and 3 opposed. The committee also agreed there are additional chances for hearings, including a public-safety meeting where the chief and vendor representatives can testify.

Don't Miss a Word: See the Full Meeting!

Go beyond summaries. Unlock every video, transcript, and key insight with a Founder Membership.

✓
Get instant access to full meeting videos
✓
Search and clip any phrase from complete transcripts
✓
Receive AI-powered summaries & custom alerts
✓
Enjoy lifetime, unrestricted access to government data
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee