BY KEITH N. CARTER
Los Alamos

After the highly attended and poorly run August 27 meeting on ALPR usage in Los Alamos County, I found that most county councilors voted for something they had little knowledge of and largely relied on information from the Los Alamos Police Department. It also became apparent in this meeting that the police were presenting a very one sided argument. I personally support much of what the LAPD does but I think there is a place to draw the line. 24/7 surveillance on everyday citizens strips us of our right to privacy and our precious civil liberties. Lastly I feel the way the meeting was run requiring attendees to write their questions or concerns on a small postcard and allow the police department to sort through and choose which softball questions they would like to answer effectively stripped individuals of their voices.

The police made several statements that bothered me. One statement that bothered me was their claim that they “required” ALPR systems to keep the community safe. They would like this but it is not required to keep communities safe as I show in my attached report. Another statement was their claim that they are aware of the public backlash on Flock cameras and think that by telling those less informed that the Axon system they are implementing is not subject to the same scrutiny, when these systems are just as open to vulnerabilities and hackers. But they seem to miss the point entirely: people do not want to be surveilled in a police like state in their own low crime community where it can introduce additional attack vectors against people and their right to privacy. 

I hope each of you will consider using your constitutionally protected First Amendment rights and consider posting the attached report https://drive.proton.me/urls/WKSXV61VTR#noQcUAPI6ET5 and this email letter. Only the latter if you feel it is helpful. The attached report is a lengthy nine page summary with indices, a persuasive argument, and data obtained from reliable sources, and a list of those sources. If you decide to use the report directly you might consider utilizing – Part One items one through seven (the persuasive argument), or a portion thereof and providing a link to download the full report. I would also like to see people peacefully engage with the city council members so you may consider posting their official emails in the article. 

Please feel free to use the materials as you deem best and let me know if you have any clarifying questions. You can reach me at my personal email address. If you would like to post a link for people to contact me I ask that you publish an email I have created just for these purposes. Public email: defender-of-liberty@pm.me. 

Also please be aware that I have sent this report directly to each council member as I do not want them to approach this subject blindly in the upcoming September 8, 2026 council meeting. Fully informed they can then decide which side of the argument they support.

Thank you for your time and consideration.