Danbury Ad Hoc Committee on ATESD Privacy Policy - July 14, 2026
Danbury Ad Hoc Committee on ATESD Privacy Policy - July 14, 2026
On July 14, 2026, the Danbury City Council Ad Hoc Committee on Automated Traffic Enforcement Safety Devices (ATESD) met at 6:05 p.m. to consider the adoption of a privacy policy required by state statute (Public Act 23-116, codified as CGS §§ 14-307b through 14-307h). The meeting was chaired by Frank Salvatore, with Council members Cheryl Wallace Smith and Candace Faye, Deputy Chief Sturdevant, Tot O'Brien from the Mayor's Office, and Corporation Counsel representatives Robin Edwards and Caitlin Grace. Ex officio members Peter Bazade and Paul Rotello also attended.
Presentation on Privacy Policy
Corporation Counsel presented a PowerPoint covering both the privacy policy and the underlying ordinance (to be considered separately). The privacy policy is mandated by Connecticut law as a prerequisite for deploying red-light and speed cameras in school zones, pedestrian safety zones, and other high-risk areas. The policy governs personally identifiable information (PII) collected by the devices, including license plate numbers, photos, dates, times, locations, and payment data. Key points:
- PII cannot be disclosed to any person or entity, including law enforcement, except for trained operators or designated police employees reviewing citations.
- PII must be destroyed within 30 days after a fine is collected or a hearing is resolved, whichever is later.
- An exception allows retention of PII for up to one year from the most recent violation solely to identify repeat offenders.
- The city must report annually the number of vehicles receiving one, two, three, or four or more citations; failure to report could result in the state declining to reauthorize camera locations.
- Aggregate data (e.g., citation counts, effectiveness) is subject to FOIA disclosure, but no PII may be released.
Corporation Counsel noted that the policy language is taken directly from the state's model policy, ensuring it meets or exceeds statutory requirements.
Discussion Items
- Statutory Compliance: Council members confirmed that the policy tracks state guidelines closely and leaves little room for deviation.
- Data Retention and Federal Access: Ex officio member Paul Rotello raised concerns that the policy does not prevent federal government subpoenas or other demands for data, citing examples like Flock Safety sharing data without local consent. Corporation Counsel acknowledged that warrants or subpoenas could compel disclosure, and noted that the one-year retention period is a maximum, not a minimum—the city could adopt a shorter retention period. Chair Salvatore suggested that in some cases (e.g., serious speeding), law enforcement access via warrant could be beneficial.
- Contemporaneous Adoption: It was clarified that the resolution to adopt the privacy policy would be effective only when the accompanying ordinance authorizing the cameras is also adopted by the full City Council.
Key Outcomes
- The committee voted unanimously (all ayes, no opposed) to recommend that the City Council approve the proposed privacy policy, as presented, with the understanding that the policy will be adopted concurrently with the ATESD ordinance.
- The motion was made by Chair Salvatore, seconded by Council member Wallace Smith, and passed without further amendment.
- The ad hoc committee then adjourned to proceed to the next agenda item (the ordinance).
Meeting Transcript
Are you five? I'm gonna get this ad hoc started. Uh this ad hoc uh officially starting at 6.05 p.m. is the adoption of the privacy policy for the automated traffic enforcement safety devices. My name is Frank Salvatore. I'm the chair with me. I have Cheryl Wallace Smith and Candace Faye, the two uh city council persons who are on the ad hoc. We have uh Deputy Chief Sturdevant here. We have Tot O'Brien from the mayor's office. We have Robin Edwards and Caitlin Grace from the Corporation Council. In the room, we also have ex officio members, uh President Peter Bazade and Paul Rotello and uh members of the community. Did I miss anybody? See if I don't have my glasses on, I don't I don't see. So I don't miss anybody. Okay. So we're going to start off by asking corporation counsel to do a presentation because actually this uh ad hoc and the next ad hoc are kind of linked together. But we wanted to do the privacy policy first because that's uh probably the easiest one to go through before we get to the ordinance for the cameras. So ladies, you have the floor. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Salvatore. Good evening, everyone. And I just have a few opening comments, and then we're going to we have a PowerPoint presentation for you this evening that actually covers the privacy policy as well as the ordinance, and we'll walk you through a few slides until we get to the privacy policy, and then we can stop and answer any questions that you have. But just by way of brief background information, this ad hoc is convened for the purposes of discussing the privacy policy. And the privacy policy, as Mr. Salvatore just pointed out, is to be adopted if an ordinance that provides for the use of automated traffic enforcement safety devices, ATE, SDs, as are known. Um also people call them red light or speed cameras, is adopted by the city. Um by way of very brief background information. In 2023, the state of Connecticut enacted a public act, which is now codified, and it's enabling legislation that provides for allowing towns and cities to employ these devices. Approximately 15 cities and towns throughout the state have adopted ordinances that provide for this at this time, and um which were actually approved by DOT. There are five currently under consideration. Adoption of such an ordinance represents a shift in traffic management. You don't need to rely solely on police patrols. Um the use of these devices provides for a more uniform oversight of high-risk areas. The goal is to reduce crashes, injuries, and fatalities by using these devices to monitor and enforce the running of red lights and speed in excess of 10 miles per hour over the posted speed limit. And you know, it's to improve traffic in school zones, pedestrian zones, and other high areas where there are safety concerns. So the process begins tonight with the adoption of an ordinance and the privacy policy, which is required to be adopted as part of that. And that's what we'll focus on tonight. So at this point, we can turn to our PowerPoint presentation, and Caitlin will run you through the first few slides. Um we hope it will be informative for you. Okay. Public Act 23116, which was codified as Connecticut General Statute sections 14307B through 1430H, allows municipalities to use ATSD, which is automatic traffic enforcement safety devices at locations within school zones, pedestrian safety zones, and other locations in such municipality. As long as they adopt four specific things. So first, it's the adoption of an ordinance in accordance with the statute's requirements. Second is the adoption of a model privacy policy in accordance with the statutes requirements. There also needs to be an adoption of a comprehensive safety action plan, which is currently being drafted by our planning and zoning department. And a plan drafted by the Danbury Police Department and the city traffic engineer, which has to be approved by the Connecticut Department of Transportation. An automatic uh automatic traffic and enforcement safety device. And if I will for the rest of the presentation be calling it an ATESD device. Um, those are two things.
openpublica.com