Eli’s Law Is Changing School Security in Arkansas. Here’s What Schools Need to Know 

School security has traditionally focused on the places cameras can see: entrances, hallways, parking lots, classrooms, and the perimeter. 

Arkansas’ Eli’s Law introduces a different challenge. 

Signed into law in 2025 as Act 908, Eli’s Law requires Arkansas public school districts and open-enrollment public charter schools to install audio recording devices in every locker room and changing room beginning with the 2027–2028 school year. 

For school leaders, that means preparing for more than the installation of new hardware. Districts will need to think about how recordings are captured, retained, accessed, and incorporated into their broader approach to campus security—all while protecting the privacy of students. 

Why Eli’s Law Changes the Conversation Around School Security 

Some of the most sensitive areas on a school campus are also places where video surveillance isn’t appropriate. 

Locker rooms and changing areas are an obvious example. 

When an incident or allegation occurs in one of these spaces, administrators may have limited information available to determine what happened. Eli’s Law is designed to introduce another source of evidence without requiring cameras in these highly private environments. 

The law requires audio recording devices in each locker room and changing room on public school and open-enrollment public charter school property. Schools must also conspicuously post signs notifying individuals that audio recording is taking place. 

For security and IT teams, however, installing a recorder is only the beginning. 

The bigger question is: How do you manage that information responsibly once you have it? 

What Does Eli’s Law Require? 

Arkansas schools have time to prepare, but the requirements are specific. 

Beginning with the 2027–2028 school year, covered schools must have audio recording devices installed in locker rooms and changing rooms. 

The law also establishes requirements around how those recordings are handled: 

• Notification: Schools must post conspicuous signage notifying individuals that audio recording devices are present. 
• Minimum retention: Recordings cannot be destroyed until at least 90 days after they were created. 
• Maximum retention: Recordings generally cannot be maintained for longer than 12 months, unless an allegation of wrongdoing exists and the recording may serve as evidence. 
• Deletion notice: Schools must publish notice on their website at least 10 days before destroying a recording. 
• Restricted requests: Recordings may only be requested by a school administrator or by a parent, legal guardian, or person standing in loco parentis who presents an allegation of wrongdoing for which the recording may be evidence. 
• Potential funding: The law permits schools to use available state funding, including certain school-safety funding, to implement its requirements. 

These requirements make audio recording part of a larger information-management challenge. 

Schools aren’t simply being asked to record. They’re being asked to maintain an evidence system. 

Compliance Requires More Than an Audio Recorder 

It can be tempting to approach a new requirement like Eli’s Law as a hardware project: 

Determine how many locker rooms need coverage. Install recording devices. Post the required signs. Done. 

But that leaves some of the most important operational questions unanswered. 

Where will recordings be stored? 

How will administrators locate the right recording after an allegation? 

Who has access to the system? 

How will districts ensure recordings are retained for the appropriate period? 

Can administrators determine who accessed or exported information? 

And how does audio evidence fit alongside video, access control, alarms, and other security information when an incident extends beyond the locker room? 

These are questions districts should consider before deployment. 

Think Beyond the Locker Room 

Consider an incident that begins in a locker room and continues into a hallway. 

Audio may provide important context for what happened inside the locker room. But once the individuals involved leave that space, administrators may need to review hallway cameras, door activity, or other security information to understand what happened next. 

When each source of information lives in a separate system, an investigation can quickly become fragmented. 

One system contains audio. 

Another contains video. 

Another contains access events. 

Administrators are left piecing together a timeline manually. 

A more unified approach can make it easier for authorized personnel to move from one piece of evidence to another and develop a clearer understanding of an incident. 

That is why schools preparing for Eli’s Law should consider the requirement as part of their broader physical security strategy, rather than treating audio recording as an isolated compliance project. 

Privacy Has to Be Part of the Architecture 

Audio recording in locker rooms and changing rooms understandably raises privacy considerations. 

Eli’s Law itself places restrictions around who may request recordings and establishes limits on how long those recordings should generally be maintained. 

Technology decisions should reinforce those protections. 

Districts evaluating systems should consider capabilities such as role-based permissions, clearly defined retention policies, secure storage, and auditability around administrative activity. 

The objective isn’t to make sensitive recordings broadly accessible. 

It’s the opposite. 

Schools need to ensure that recordings are available when legitimately needed while remaining appropriately protected the rest of the time. 

Start Preparing Before the 2027–2028 School Year 

The compliance deadline may seem distant, but districts shouldn’t wait until 2027 to begin evaluating their approach. 

Audio recording affects security, IT, administration, privacy, policy, and potentially legal teams. Implementing it responsibly will require coordination across those groups. 

A good starting point is to inventory every locker room and changing room across the district and then evaluate the infrastructure, storage, retention, permissions, and administrative processes that will be required to support them. 

It is also an opportunity to look beyond compliance. 

Ask whether your existing security infrastructure makes investigations easier—or creates additional work whenever an incident occurs. 

Because the best approach to Eli’s Law isn’t simply installing another device. 

It’s building a security environment where authorized administrators can find the information they need, protect the information they don’t, and respond to incidents with greater context. 

Preparing Your Schools for Eli’s Law 

Eli’s Law creates a new requirement for Arkansas schools, but it also highlights a broader shift in school security. 

Effective physical security increasingly depends on bringing together information from multiple sources while maintaining appropriate controls around sensitive data. 

Rhombus helps schools manage physical security through a unified platform that brings together video security, access control, sensors, alarms, and other security capabilities. 

For Arkansas districts preparing for Eli’s Law, now is the time to evaluate how audio recording will fit into that larger security environment. 

Talk to the Rhombus team about preparing your schools for Eli’s Law and building a security strategy designed for the requirements ahead. 

This article is provided for informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. Schools should consult appropriate legal counsel regarding specific requirements and compliance with Eli’s Law.