On this episode of Municipal Equation. Drones are becoming more mainstream as a technology and also more relevant to cities, both in both in terms of the possibilities looming for cities using drones as well as the challenges inherent for cities when they need to legislate on drone operation. Where drones intersect with local government? Possibilities,

Uh-huh. What was this?

The town of Manio currently uses a DJI Phantom three Professional. This is Steve Josik. He's the town's IT specialist, and he flies the drone. There wasn't really any precedent for a town, operating a drone, and actually we were having issues finding support networks, other towns that that had similar ambitions. We were hoping not to be a pioneer, in the field, since we are so small and have limited staff, but we called around and and, spoke to a couple of municipalities, in Utah and Texas, that had used drones.

We are part of a government access channel, and so we had a lot of uses that we wanted, kind of varied uses that we wanted, to use the the drone for. We had special events, traffic issues, public works projects.

we were only able to assess damage that we could see driving down through our streets. And Pirates Cove is out on a peninsula, so it's relatively low cost for us to get out and fly and survey damage that we wouldn't be able to see it any other way.

I can't say exactly when the first city, looked at a drone and said, oh, maybe this is more than just a toy or or something that we thought of it, in in past years. But the origin of this report is really that NLC recognized that drones are becoming more mainstream as a technology and also more relevant to cities, both in both in terms of the possibilities looming for cities using drones, as well as the challenges inherent for cities when they need to legislate on drone operation, whether that operation be commercial or personal or used by hobbyists or public. So we recognize this need amongst our members. We heard it from a lot of them, for guidance, especially as it relates to the, I guess, it's semi new FAA rule on drone usage. And this really is sort of the Wild West for cities and that it's so new and that's kind of our job. Our job is to help local governments and policymakers address some of these new technological innovations. So we saw a real need in terms of the challenges and opportunities posed by drones, drone usage, and where it fits into existing regulatory context.

You know, oftentimes, cities will use them to, look for, criminal suspects if there's somebody on the run. We've heard of them use this as firefighting mechanism, and then as as ambulance services in in remote and rural areas as well. Cities also, have have started thinking about using drones for inspections and environmental monitoring and disaster management. In February 2015, the city of Somerville, Massachusetts hired an aerial cinematography and multimedia company to actually survey their municipal buildings for excessive snow build up. So, they realized that it would be quicker and probably cheaper than sending out in person, you know, person inspectors. And then finally, we we have seen, commercial or drones used for precision farming, and aerial photography. And in the near future, I think we've all heard about, you know, probably Amazon package delivery. So using drones to spray and treat crops could definitely save time and money, result in more precision application of pesticides or other chemicals. And then, more than half of the, 100 or 1,000, excuse me, commercial exemptions granted by the FAA, initially, for drones were for aerial photography. So this is really becoming an important tool for a variety of industries, not just cities, but, you know, on the commercial side, particularly real estate. And then, of course, I I mentioned already online retailers, not just Amazon, but also Walmart, Google, and Alibaba are developing drone delivery systems as well. So we can expect that, I think, probably fairly soon to to kind of be a big, blip on the radar of this discussion.

however, the world sales of drones hit approximately 4,300,000. And and by the January 2016, over 325,000 of those drones had been registered with the FAA, and that was the highest number the FAA had ever seen. So the FAA expects 2,500,000 drones will be sold domestically in 2016, and there's been a lot of speculation that they will be a pretty hot item under a lot of Christmas trees this year. So while several cities are are currently experimenting, with various ways in which drones can be used, fewer have, really delineated how public officials can use drones. A good bit of the city legislation passed on drones to this point has been passed to regulate recreational use of drones. So kind of more of like your hobbyist, you know, citizens who are interested in in aviation, and wanna fly their their recreational drones around. So, unfortunately, the answer is that we don't really know at this point how many cities have purchased drones for municipal use, but this is something we're hoping to do research on in the near future, in one of our future surveys with city officials.

Yeah. Well, I mean, to your point, drones really do present a challenge for cities. They raise safety and privacy and nuisance and trespassing concerns, all of which are compounded by this lack of accountability associated with most drone operations. The fact that people can fly them, and you can't necessarily always, connect the operator with the device. So, you know, like you mentioned, the safety issues, for example, are when operators fly their drones over people or near airplanes, aircraft. City residents often have privacy concerns with any small device that's kind of hovering nearby that could potentially be taking photos or collecting data on them. And frankly, cities need to address any circumstance in which, a municipally owned drone might be taking video or collecting information about their citizens. That is one of those very, challenging sticky problems that that cities need to address before they deploy any kind of public drone fleet. Drones, also, I mentioned, can be operated remotely, so it makes it difficult to identify who's flying if there is, unfortunately, an accident that causes injury to persons or property. And and these are some of the most commonly cited challenges. Cities need to, think about how to address them. And from what we've seen so far, the FAA's rule really left some opportunity for them to take an assessment of their own communities and figure out the best legislative solution. And these have been the kind of crux of of the legislative solutions that are being put forth. So, a lot of focus on safety, making sure that their citizens are safe and out of harm's way if drones are in operation in the community, and also the preservation of public space. We've seen a lot of ordinances that have focused on, you know, maybe a park that, city officials don't necessarily want to be inundated with drones or perhaps a mega event where there's gonna be 50,000 people in one place. And the idea of drones flying overhead seems a little bit risky. So, really, those are kind of the two big issues that we've seen kinda come up. Now NLC is always, in favor of local control over these issues. That is kind of what we what we what we push for. That being said, we do encourage our members not just to ban drones outright, to be really thoughtful about how they act toward new technology technologies and technological innovations like drones. So rather than, you know, just ban something outright because it's scary and new and we don't really know what it looks like, we encourage our members to carefully consider how drone technology might serve them and how it might work most effectively in their communities. So there's always that balance that local policymakers have to strike in terms of embracing innovation while keeping their cities safe and efficient. Right. Right. And on the topic of regulation, you mentioned the FAA rules.

put forth a rule that treats all drones as aircraft and subjects them to federal aviation regulation. Federal law, they've created four primary categories of unmanned aerial vehicles or or UAVs, remote pilots holding a part 107 certificate, public UAS or UAV operators, model aircraft operators, and then those holding three three three exemptions. So the majority of operators in this case are likely going to apply for and attain what's called a part one zero seven certificate, which will allow them to operate both recreationally and commercially. Model aircraft operators will have to meet somewhat stricter requirements and be ruled by a set of kind of national and community guidelines that have been established for many years, for their rep recreational operations. And then public operators have the choice to either apply for what's called a certificate of authorization, COA, from the FAA delineating the operational use of the drone, or they can opt for also a part 107 certificate. Really the FAA in our reading left large swaths of regulatory territory up to the local and state authorities. They really didn't establish much more than guidelines for safe operation and kind of a minimum threshold for what they would investigate if an accident did occur. So it it really felt like there was a there was a lot of gray area in the rule, that cities could come in and regulate, on this issue in a way that makes sense for their community.

Well, yeah, like I said, first and foremost, I'll I'll just reinforce the idea that, cities do need to adhere to the FAA rule. So they would need to apply for either that COA or that part 107 certificate to make sure that, they were complying with the FAA's rulemaking. But there are also, state laws to contend with and to consider. Much of the legislation that has been passed in this area has been at the state level. Over one third, of all states now have laws governing how public agencies can use drones. Several states out loan use, of drones by law enforcement and require probable cause and warrants before drones can be used, often with some exceptions. But cities really need to think about that as well. In addition to complying with the FAA's regulation, also being aware of any state regulations that might exist. So there are, you know, there are as with so many technological innovations, there are a lot of moving parts that I think city officials need to be aware of. And and if I had to if I had to, break it down to kind of the three considerations, it would be the FAA's rulemaking, making sure you're complying with that, making sure you're complying with any state legislation or state law, and then, figuring out how it best works for your particular community.

a a remote controlled airplane or one of those small drones that we might see under a Christmas tree? Sure. So in in recent years, I think when people heard the word drone, it probably referred to an unmanned aircraft in a military context overseas. So military drones can have wingspans of well over a 100 feet, and they can weigh, anywhere from, you know, six around 16 tons. Today, most of the drones that we're talking about or that we're seeing, discussed in headlines domestically are these small model quadcopters or kind of helicopters with four propellers with cameras attached to them. Many of the highly rated consumer drones also have high high definition cameras, might weigh about 10 pounds and have flight times of around twenty minutes. So as of December 2015, all drones that weigh over half a pound, not the kind that, you know, you might see a young child playing with, that will be flown outside have to be registered with the FAA before they can be flown. So that's the distinction they're making, that weight of over a half pound. And the FAA hopes that this new registration requirement will not only provide more accountability for all drone users regardless of what category they they might fall into, but will also serve as a kind of conduit to help educate individuals who maybe are not familiar with some of the national regulations and safety practices, or maybe have no prior flying experience. They're not familiar with model aircraft regulations. So, I think that's why they they passed what some might see as as such a stringent rule for for registration.

But also maybe promote innovation and kind of embrace this this exciting new technology. City should focus on two things. First, using land use and zoning powers to designate when and where drones can take off land operate as well as any operational limit limitations or criteria. So this is this is not a new power. Cities have always had kind of this land use power at their disposal. And I think the distinction here is even though the FAA regulates airspace, these are still taking off from a particular place that is located in a city. So that's kind of the nuance there with with the land use and zoning powers. The second thing they should focus on is creating ordinances that punish operators for operating UAVs in a in a wreck in a reckless way that might endanger persons or property. And they, like you mentioned, need to also consider appropriate enforcement infrastructure. So I think a lot of the enforcement for these types of things is going to come down to local law enforcement. And, you know, that is a challenge for some local law enforcement agencies that might feel already overburdened with things that, were not traditionally in their purview. But they're really the only, as far as we can see, suitable, body to to regulate and enforce these rules. So a lot of cities have kind of done that, and, have tried to establish, more than guidelines for for safe operation and a minimum threshold, for investigations into accidents. Like I said, the the bulk of the legislating on this will will really fall to local and state authorities.

Anyway, here's Torbit and then you'll hear from Steven Hartzell. Steven, privacy is always gonna be a concern of the public. I can attest to that working with the legislation that was put into place. That was the number one concern that we heard from the general citizen. But a proxy is always gonna be a concern of the public when discussing UAS or drone activities. What role will cities likely play in protecting reasonable expectations of privacy against widespread

drone visibility in neighborhoods, shopping centers, parks, etcetera? And just a heads up, Hartzell is really detailed in his answer. I'm gonna play the whole thing unedited. So privacy is one of these issues that I think is gonna keep on coming up. When we were putting this panel together, one of my co panelists sitting up at this table said, man, are we really still talking about privacy and drones? I mean, haven't we gotten past that? And the short answer is no. And part of the reason is, there's been public perception over the last few to several years as drones have really come into public consciousness that, the drones can be used and are being used for certain nefarious purposes to invade people's privacy. And the example that's always given is somebody sunbathing in the backyard, somebody's daughter sunbathing. And the truth of the matter is that there some of that perception is, maybe faulty and maybe faulty and maybe a little bit, unnecessary, but I think there are also very legitimate privacy concerns. And one of the things that wigs people out is when we get new technology that we haven't had before, that's mobile technology, and that perhaps can even be used in a manner that is surreptitious, that causes people legitimate concern. And you think back to cell phones fifteen years ago when people put when companies put cameras in cell phones, and the first question was, what are we gonna do with that camera? Because we're really concerned it's a mobile small device. Now here we are sixteen years later, and at least two major cell phone manufacturers market their phones on the basis of how good their camera is. So in that fifteen year period, we've become accustomed to these devices, and I think that over time, the public will become more accustomed to, to drones, and the privacy concerns, I think, will diminish some. So what does that really mean though for for local governments in terms of regulating in that area? And my view and our firm represents both commercial enterprises and also represents some local governments in various matters. And so my view of that issue for local governments is we need to be really, really careful and deliberate about thinking whether or not we really need to regulate in the area of privacy. As representative Torbett mentioned, there's already a state law that governs many aspects of privacy that is very drone specific. In addition, there's a bunch of other state law claims that can be brought against any kind of technology that abates privacy, whether it's a criminal keeping Tom statue or whether it's, cyber stalking. There are these other mechanisms that are already in place that are largely technologically neutral. And I think that sometimes when you take, take laws and ordinances and you target them at a specific technology, I think it can have unintended consequences. So I'd be careful at the local level about about considering passing and adopting ordinances that relate to privacy, as it as it impacts UAS operations. Now that that sort of puts aside the issue, and, of course, again, to representative Torpitt's credit, the the state statute also talks a great deal about, what law enforcement can do, and that's sort of a separate issue. There's fourth amendment concerns with any sort of government, use of of surveillance equipment. But again, from a technologically neutral standpoint, those are important issues, and we should be careful about, pulling out drones and targeting them specifically. The other thing that I wanna mention about that is, in North Carolina, and North Carolina is not unique in this regard, there's an interesting preemption wrinkle that occurs with privacy. So any local government that is looking at privacy issues or any other type of regulation that, feds is left for feds is left for the states to regulate. At the state level, and again, North Carolina is not unique in this regard, North Carolina, the constitution established that the general assembly would create political subdivisions such as municipalities and counties, and the appellate courts in North Carolina have consistently said that those political subdivisions only have the authority that is given to them by the general assembly. They don't they don't get the residual authority like states do vis a vis the the federal government. So there's also a potential issue for any local government that wants to regulate privacy and drones because we already have a state statute that's on point. And then the final thing I'll say is think about how difficult it would be as well as a practical matter for folks to know and understand what all the various privacy regulations are if we have an ordinance by ordinance basis from community to community. I live in Chapel Hill. I live in, actually, in Carrboro. I have a Chapel Hill address. Where Chapel Hill begins, Carrboro ends, I couldn't tell you. But if those two, local governments were to adopt privacy ordinances that were conflicting or inconsistent, it would be really difficult as a practical matter for folks to understand and be able to abide by them. So my counsel would be, let's let's sort of pull back the reins on any local privacy regulation.

Well, I wish I had a crystal ball. I think that it's really anybody's guess. I'm certainly will see a lot of the applications that have already been discussed are already there's already R and D on a lot of these things. I think that we'll see those come into fruition. But I think this is also unique because we don't know really what cluttered airspace even looks like in cities or in communities. So with other technological innovations, say transportation network companies like Uber and Lyft. Cities were challenged by the platform, and how to regulate that. But we're intimately familiar with what it's like for a car to drive around in the city atmosphere. We don't know what it looks like for a drone to be flying around amongst the airspace or, like, whizzing past our heads. So we can't even really imagine what this might look like, to have our airspace and cities inhabited by drone. And as I mentioned, most of the regulation to date has been aimed at at safety and more geared toward recreational operation. So who knows what this is going to look like in even twenty years? I think that there are a lot of industry private sector companies who are really looking to capitalize on this. And and anybody's guess what it's actually gonna look like in terms of the public sphere, how it's gonna be regulated by cities, and what it's gonna make our cities look like physically.

Oh, certainly. I mean, I think this is gonna be a living and breathing issue for sure. We're gonna have to keep coming back to the drawing board as we see how things play out.

technology and and burgeoning field. There's still a lot of questions that are are coming up and the answers are changing, which makes it it's difficult because you're trying to hit a moving target. What you learned six months ago might not be true six months from then.