TL;DR: Thurston County, Washington, is drafting an ordinance that would ban real-time facial recognition in public spaces, prohibit predictive policing systems, and prevent AI-based profiling on protected characteristics. If passed, any county department wanting to use AI surveillance would have to submit a public "surveillance impact report" detailing the technology, its privacy implications, and data policies. This is one of the most comprehensive local AI surveillance regulations proposed in the United States, and could become a model for other jurisdictions.
The Proposal
On January 13, 2026, Thurston County Commissioner Carolina Mejia introduced a draft ordinance during a work session aimed at establishing guardrails for AI surveillance technology [1].
The ordinance would prohibit:
- Real-time facial recognition in public spaces by any county office or department
- Predictive policing systems that target individuals or communities
- AI surveillance for discrimination: profiling, targeting, or discriminating based on protected characteristics
This isn't a vague "we'll be careful" promise. It's a legal prohibition with specific categories of banned technology.
The Transparency Requirements
Beyond the bans, the ordinance creates an accountability framework [2].
Surveillance Impact Reports: Any county department seeking to use AI-enabled surveillance technology would need to submit a public report including:
- Description of the technology and its capabilities
- Potential impacts on privacy and civil rights
- Data collection, retention, and sharing policies
- Justification for why the technology is needed
- Safeguards against misuse
The principles: The ordinance states that county use of AI surveillance must be:
- Transparent
- Accountable
- Ethical
- Narrowly tailored
- Consistent with constitutional and statutory requirements
These aren't suggestions; they'd be legal requirements for any AI surveillance deployment.
Why This Matters
Local governments often fly under the radar on surveillance. While federal debates get headlines, counties and cities quietly deploy facial recognition, license plate readers, and predictive policing with minimal oversight.
What makes Thurston County's approach notable:
- Proactive, not reactive: They're setting rules before problems emerge, not after scandals
- Comprehensive: Covers facial recognition, predictive policing, AND discriminatory AI profiling
- Transparency-first: Requires public disclosure before deployment
- Model legislation: Could be copied by other jurisdictions
Most surveillance regulation is reactive, passed after a Flock Safety scandal or a Clearview AI deployment. Thurston County is acting before the problems occur.
The National Context
This isn't happening in a vacuum. Local surveillance regulation is accelerating across the United States.
Other notable local actions:
- Portland, Oregon: Banned facial recognition for private businesses AND government agencies in 2020
- San Francisco: First major city to ban government facial recognition (2019)
- Multiple Oregon cities: Rejected or discontinued Flock Safety ALPR contracts in 2025-2026
- Charlottesville, Virginia: Ended Flock Safety contract over ICE access concerns (December 2025)
- Massachusetts: Considering statewide biometric surveillance ban
The pattern: while federal action stalls, local governments are becoming the front line of surveillance resistance.
Challenges Ahead
Proposing an ordinance is easier than passing one. Thurston County faces hurdles:
Potential obstacles:
- Law enforcement pushback: Police departments often argue surveillance technology is essential for public safety
- Vendor lobbying: Companies like Flock Safety, Clearview AI, and others actively oppose local restrictions
- Preemption: Some states have passed laws preventing local governments from restricting surveillance technology
- Definition questions: What exactly counts as "AI-enabled surveillance"? The line isn't always clear
The ordinance is currently in draft form. It will need commissioner votes and likely face public comment periods before becoming law.
What You Can Do
If You're in Thurston County
Attend public work sessions. Submit written comments supporting the ordinance. Contact your county commissioners. Local voices matter most here.
If You're Elsewhere
Share this ordinance with your local representatives. Ask why your county doesn't have similar protections. Local organizing is how these regulations spread.
Track Surveillance in Your Area
Use FOIA requests to learn what surveillance technology your local government uses. Many jurisdictions deploy technology without public notice. Our guide can help.
Support Organizations Fighting This
EFF, ACLU, and local digital rights groups work on surveillance legislation. Their research and advocacy makes ordinances like this possible.
The Bottom Line
Thurston County, Washington, is proposing one of the most comprehensive local AI surveillance regulations in the United States. Real-time facial recognition in public: banned. Predictive policing: banned. AI profiling on protected characteristics: banned.
If it passes, any AI surveillance deployment would require a public impact report. Transparency by default, not transparency by scandal.
This is how change happens: not from the top, but from the local level. County by county. City by city. Each ordinance becomes a model for the next.
Federal action on surveillance is paralyzed. But Thurston County isn't waiting.