How do you guys handle misinformed, overzealous, or grumpy Law Enforcement? (Or Jurisdiction Conflicts?)

[AtmosphericArts]

I recently had a customer request some images of Philadelphia's City Hall (located in the dense city-center). I believe I did my due diligence in checking airspace (no restrictions) and filling out a form on the City of Philadelphia website (Commercial sUAS (Part 107) Flight Notification Form - Veoci (Public Form)) to allegedly notify their Emergency Services of a flight. My flight near city hall was going to consist of taking off from a nearby park, flying directly up to 400' (nobody below the drone at any point) and taking some pics, so I'm quite sure this wasn't breaking any FAA rules.

When I got to the location near City Hall, I noticed some police officers in the park. I didn't want anybody interfering with the flight once it was started, so I figured the right thing to do was to politely tell the cops that I already notified Emergency Services via the form (didn't have anybody reaching out to tell me that the location I requested wasn't ok) and I just wanted to make them aware/comfortable that I'd be conducting a FAA-compliant flight. Naturally they immediately told me that nobody is allowed to fly drones in that district, and I'd have to call their supervisor despite me telling them about the form. I immediately called the supervisor, who naturally also told me that I can't do it without permission from the city (despite me also telling him I did just that via the form). I got a strong vibe that the police officers and supervisor just didn't want to deal with me or check on my permissions. I ended up not being able to get the pictures from anywhere close to where the client requested. What kills me is that there's a strong chance I could have just conducted the three-minute mission without telling the officers and had no issues (or taken off from outside of their district and flown into their district).

I happen to live in NYC, which is one of the most drone-unfriendly places in the country, and stuff like this is a constant worry of mine as the drone laws here are very much in the gray area (don't get me started on drones and NYC...).

My questions:

• Does Law Enforcement only have the ability to restrict who takes off/lands from their districts rather than flying over their district? For instance I imagine they wouldn't have done anything if a helicopter or airplane overflew the City Hall, but I'm sure they wouldn't want a helicopter landing in Love Park just like they wouldn't allow me to take off from there.
• Do you guys typically always notify LE prior to starting a flight? (I can see this backfiring like it did in Philly, where I probably could have conducted the mission without problems if I hadn't drawn attention to myself.)
• How much should I argue with the officers if I believe I have the right to fly in a location? (I obviously wouldn't just take off in front of them if they tell me not to, but if there's a chance they're wrong I don't want to just walk away immediately and possibly lose a customer.)
• If there aren't any local laws explicitly banning drones, on what grounds can LE officers stop me if I'm not being reckless and adhering to FAA laws?
• On the spectrum of Asking Permission to Asking Forgiveness, where do you typically land if that makes sense?
• What would you have done in the Philly example above (before, during, and after the confrontation with LEOs)? Did they have the right to forbid me from flying?

Thanks in advance for your help with this!

 

[BigAl07]

If there is a Land Use Ordinance in place then YES they can. It's no different than trespassing on posted property. It's a Land Use issue as opposed to FAA/Airspace issue.

We only notify if the following instance:
a) if the area requires it (we have some county property that require notification and APPROVAL to fly from).
b) If it's an area where we anticipate having a problem (area where people are likely to complain/be a problem).

But if I see Law Enforcement I'll usually strike up a conversation to begin with just to be safe. Better than finding out LATER that you broke an ordinance. Just how we roll.

If they require Approval then the form is just a way of asking for it and not actual permission. The only way to know is ask an attorney to review all the pertinent docs and try to give counsel.

Land Use is a local issue well outside of any FAA control. You gotta check and obey local ordinances always.

Asking for Forgiveness is disrespectful and could put a black eye (another one) on the rest of us. Keep in mind you're an AMBASSADOR for the industry and society is just waiting to make an example out of the ones who can't help themselves.

I would have done as they said and NOT flown. Yes they have the right to keep you from launching and recovering your aircraft. You have to decide do you have the desire and $$ to fight it or not.

 

[AtmosphericArts]

If there is a Land Use Ordinance in place then YES they can. It's no different than trespassing on posted property. It's a Land Use issue as opposed to FAA/Airspace issue.

We only notify if the following instance:
a) if the area requires it (we have some county property that require notification and APPROVAL to fly from).
b) If it's an area where we anticipate having a problem (area where people are likely to complain/be a problem).

But if I see Law Enforcement I'll usually strike up a conversation to begin with just to be safe. Better than finding out LATER that you broke an ordinance. Just how we roll.

If they require Approval then the form is just a way of asking for it and not actual permission. The only way to know is ask an attorney to review all the pertinent docs and try to give counsel.

Land Use is a local issue well outside of any FAA control. You gotta check and obey local ordinances always.

Asking for Forgiveness is disrespectful and could put a black eye (another one) on the rest of us. Keep in mind you're an AMBASSADOR for the industry and society is just waiting to make an example out of the ones who can't help themselves.

I would have done as they said and NOT flown. Yes they have the right to keep you from launching and recovering your aircraft. You have to decide do you have the desire and $$ to fight it or not.

Thanks for the reply. I think we're on the same page on this one.

Regarding the Philly UAS Form, I read it as a flight notification form rather than a request since the form states "The City of Philadelphia (the “City”) is not the approving authority for small unmanned aircraft system (sUAS) operations." at the top and makes no mention of me needing to request additional authorizations from the city or law enforcement. I just didn't like that the LEOs just immediately dismissed me like I hadn't done any research or tried to fly within the law.

Can you recommend any reliable ways of finding out what the specific ordinances would be for situations like this (other than consulting an attorney as you mentioned, which is cost-prohibitive for most of the jobs I do).

As I'm sure everybody here can agree to, the FAA and local authorities seriously need to get on the same page and agree on who has jurisdiction.

Ultimately I ended up not flying near the city center as I'm sure you and everybody here would recommend, but it still feels like I could have if I put up more of a fight or knew which laws to cite.

 

[R Martin]

I think you handled the situation right. Sorry it didn't work out for you. I could give you an answer but our situations are completely different. I operate in one locality and I know what I can and can't do. You, on the other hand, operate across a lot of jurisdictions and I can't image what a pain that must be. You are right in that the FAA and local LEOs need to get on the same page. That would make our lives a lot easier to manage.

 

[LUIS MARTINEZ]

I recently had a customer request some images of Philadelphia's City Hall (located in the dense city-center). I believe I did my due diligence in checking airspace (no restrictions) and filling out a form on the City of Philadelphia website (Commercial sUAS (Part 107) Flight Notification Form - Veoci (Public Form)) to allegedly notify their Emergency Services of a flight. My flight near city hall was going to consist of taking off from a nearby park, flying directly up to 400' (nobody below the drone at any point) and taking some pics, so I'm quite sure this wasn't breaking any FAA rules.

When I got to the location near City Hall, I noticed some police officers in the park. I didn't want anybody interfering with the flight once it was started, so I figured the right thing to do was to politely tell the cops that I already notified Emergency Services via the form (didn't have anybody reaching out to tell me that the location I requested wasn't ok) and I just wanted to make them aware/comfortable that I'd be conducting a FAA-compliant flight. Naturally they immediately told me that nobody is allowed to fly drones in that district, and I'd have to call their supervisor despite me telling them about the form. I immediately called the supervisor, who naturally also told me that I can't do it without permission from the city (despite me also telling him I did just that via the form). I got a strong vibe that the police officers and supervisor just didn't want to deal with me or check on my permissions. I ended up not being able to get the pictures from anywhere close to where the client requested. What kills me is that there's a strong chance I could have just conducted the three-minute mission without telling the officers and had no issues (or taken off from outside of their district and flown into their district).

I happen to live in NYC, which is one of the most drone-unfriendly places in the country, and stuff like this is a constant worry of mine as the drone laws here are very much in the gray area (don't get me started on drones and NYC...).

My questions:

• Does Law Enforcement only have the ability to restrict who takes off/lands from their districts rather than flying over their district? For instance I imagine they wouldn't have done anything if a helicopter or airplane overflew the City Hall, but I'm sure they wouldn't want a helicopter landing in Love Park just like they wouldn't allow me to take off from there.
• Do you guys typically always notify LE prior to starting a flight? (I can see this backfiring like it did in Philly, where I probably could have conducted the mission without problems if I hadn't drawn attention to myself.)
• How much should I argue with the officers if I believe I have the right to fly in a location? (I obviously wouldn't just take off in front of them if they tell me not to, but if there's a chance they're wrong I don't want to just walk away immediately and possibly lose a customer.)
• If there aren't any local laws explicitly banning drones, on what grounds can LE officers stop me if I'm not being reckless and adhering to FAA laws?
• On the spectrum of Asking Permission to Asking Forgiveness, where do you typically land if that makes sense?
• What would you have done in the Philly example above (before, during, and after the confrontation with LEOs)? Did they have the right to forbid me from flying?

Thanks in advance for your help with this!

If I have big $$ riding on one flight I am going down to city hall in person, and to the PD to clear in advance (but that's just me).
You did the right thing by a strategic retreat. Pushing cops usually has a bad ending.(from a retired cop)
FAA is limited to what they can do (airspace only) The local fuzz will have the final say on the ground.

HOWEVER, sometimes the little guys score a win

Judge rules in favor of drones taking flight in Michigan public parks | InterDrone

www.interdrone.com

 

[shooter]

I flew in downtown Santa Fe about a year or so ago. I did my homework prior to, checking all online city ordinances...nothing referred to drones, period.

I notified the airport manager and the hospital helicopter operations, even though it was not required due to distance and there were no TFRs in effect.

As I was flying, I was approached by an officer, "Hey, can we talk?" Sure, I say, and landed. As he was looking at my FAA card, which I offered right away, he said there was an ordinance against UAS downtown. I said that's weird because I checked and couldn't find anything at all. As we were talking about FAA licenses, where did I work for my "real job," etc., etc., he admitted that the city was "thinking" about passing an ordinance, but hadn't gotten to it yet.

Basically, I got the impression that he just wanted to see if I was on the level and not some yahoo posing a danger to folks in the area. It helped that I mentioned I was in law enforcement at one time and that I flew a lot for my real job.

My advice...if they say you can't, respectfully ask them to show you where it says you can't and go from there. But, don't burn any bridges.

 

[MapMaker53]

Well.. I just read that form. It actually states "You will receive confirmation at the e-mail address you provided that the application was received. Keep a copy of the receipt for your records. You should also have a copy with you during your sUAS operations. You will only be contacted if a member of the FAA or City’s public safety group needs more information regarding your sUAS operations. If you are not contacted with a request for more information – please continue with your planned sUAS flight. If you need to make any changes to this submission or cancel the flight, please e-mail [email protected]. Thank you."

I agree you shouldn't argue with the police, who in this case appear to be misinformed or just anti-drone despite your documents. The next time, I would make an appointment to meet with the local Precinct Commander ahead of time to present all of your documents and to explain your intended COMMERCIAL flight plan. Patrol officers have to make on-the-spot decisions, and sometimes they get it wrong -- especially with local drone laws being ever changing these days.

My same advice would apply to NYC commercial flying. I've called the city to find out how I can apply for a daily permit (figuring big developers, movie companies, etc. must SOMETIMES be using drones on projects) and was told that the city department in charge of the General Drone Ban is the NYPD, and it was suggested that I seek permission with local Precinct to fly a site. Haven't needed to do that yet, but I think that is the only possible option. I would also tell them that you would be happy to have a patrol car present to watch your operation. Show proof of liability insurance, and explain that the FAA (I believe) conducts a background check before issuing a Remote Pilot Certification.

In the case of your Philadelphia City Hall shoot, You probably could have respectfully requested to speak to a Supervisor who may have been more aware of the law or taken your documents into consideration before you packed up.

 

[TreeLineView]

This site is at least a start for research. We live/work in an evolving industry with plenty of myth and little clear cut guidelines to follow. US Drone Laws (2019) - Drone Laws by State

 

[AtmosphericArts]

Well.. I just read that form. It actually states "You will receive confirmation at the e-mail address you provided that the application was received. Keep a copy of the receipt for your records. You should also have a copy with you during your sUAS operations. You will only be contacted if a member of the FAA or City’s public safety group needs more information regarding your sUAS operations. If you are not contacted with a request for more information – please continue with your planned sUAS flight. If you need to make any changes to this submission or cancel the flight, please e-mail [email protected]. Thank you."

I agree you shouldn't argue with the police, who in this case appear to be misinformed or just anti-drone despite your documents. The next time, I would make an appointment to meet with the local Precinct Commander ahead of time to present all of your documents and to explain your intended COMMERCIAL flight plan. Patrol officers have to make on-the-spot decisions, and sometimes they get it wrong -- especially with local drone laws being ever changing these days.

My same advice would apply to NYC commercial flying. I've called the city to find out how I can apply for a daily permit (figuring big developers, movie companies, etc. must SOMETIMES be using drones on projects) and was told that the city department in charge of the General Drone Ban is the NYPD, and it was suggested that I seek permission with local Precinct to fly a site. Haven't needed to do that yet, but I think that is the only possible option. I would also tell them that you would be happy to have a patrol car present to watch your operation. Show proof of liability insurance, and explain that the FAA (I believe) conducts a background check before issuing a Remote Pilot Certification.

In the case of your Philadelphia City Hall shoot, You probably could have respectfully requested to speak to a Supervisor who may have been more aware of the law or taken your documents into consideration before you packed up.

I got the same impression as you from the form, and the LEOs did tell me to talk to their supervisor, but he had the same "not allowed, not my problem" attitude as the LEOs on-site and just told me to ask somebody else (the city). Luckily my client didn't have a concrete shot list, and they were happy with the shots I ended up being able to get.

In the future I'll definitely call the PD ahead to at least hear what they have to say, but I think I should also make LEOs more accountable by asking them to cite the actual law/ordinance that they're claiming to enforce. For people in the know, is it a reasonable assumption that a typical patrol officer would/should be able to actually tell me specifics about laws they're enforcing? Are they required to if I ask or do I just have to trust that what they're telling me is fact? Alternatively, is it just their call to arrest/not arrest and then the prosecutor will determine next steps based on if I actually broke a law or not?

Hopefully this proposed law will help to clarify the jurisdiction issues and not exacerbate them: BREAKING NEWS: This New Drone Bill Would Make the Airspace Over People’s Homes Private Property

 

[MapMaker53]

I highly doubt that will pass. IMO the FAA is not going to give up their ability to control the zero to 200 ft airspace and just hand it over to the whim of local governments and civilians. That would virtually eliminate the ability to conduct commercial drone operations in any residential or urban area for real estate, construction, inspection, news reporting, delivery services (UPS is developing a drone-launching truck), etc. I didn't know drones were a major problem in Utah. LOL

 

[BigAl07]

......Hopefully this proposed law will help to clarify the jurisdiction issues and not exacerbate them: BREAKING NEWS: This New Drone Bill Would Make the Airspace Over People’s Homes Private Property

This one sentence from that article should give all of us "Drone GuRus" great alarm:

"....bills that want to establish state, tribal and local government jurisdiction over low altitude airspace – and bar uninvited drones from flying at low altitudes over private property. "
So those people who are trying to restrict your Take Off & Landing will then have LEGAL ability to also restrict where you fly in the AIR..... you just think it's hard to find places to fly legally now wait until every entity from your babysitter on up has authority to deny your flights..

That's a VERY bad bill IMHO. VERY BAD!!

 

[adm_geomatics]

If there is a Land Use Ordinance in place then YES they can. It's no different than trespassing on posted property. It's a Land Use issue as opposed to FAA/Airspace issue.

We only notify if the following instance:
a) if the area requires it (we have some county property that require notification and APPROVAL to fly from).
b) If it's an area where we anticipate having a problem (area where people are likely to complain/be a problem).

But if I see Law Enforcement I'll usually strike up a conversation to begin with just to be safe. Better than finding out LATER that you broke an ordinance. Just how we roll.

If they require Approval then the form is just a way of asking for it and not actual permission. The only way to know is ask an attorney to review all the pertinent docs and try to give counsel.

Land Use is a local issue well outside of any FAA control. You gotta check and obey local ordinances always.

Asking for Forgiveness is disrespectful and could put a black eye (another one) on the rest of us. Keep in mind you're an AMBASSADOR for the industry and society is just waiting to make an example out of the ones who can't help themselves.

I would have done as they said and NOT flown. Yes they have the right to keep you from launching and recovering your aircraft. You have to decide do you have the desire and $$ to fight it or not.

Excellent answer! Good info to have in the back of your head. I am the same way about keeping everyone around me informed on exactly what I am doing, but extra diligence is a benefit when flying around any municipal or government properties. Luckily the only interactions I have had with law enforcement have been an interest in what I am doing rather than a "How can we mess with this guy?". I actually got a contract with a nearby local police department to consult them on how to operate a drone after two of their patrol cars pulled right up on me. I was at a subdivision project and immediately thought "Oh, here we go", but they were very nice when I engaged them first. Have confidence and take advantage of those opportunities!

 

[AtmosphericArts]

This one sentence from that article should give all of us "Drone GuRus" great alarm:

"....bills that want to establish state, tribal and local government jurisdiction over low altitude airspace – and bar uninvited drones from flying at low altitudes over private property. "
So those people who are trying to restrict your Take Off & Landing will then have LEGAL ability to also restrict where you fly in the AIR..... you just think it's hard to find places to fly legally now wait until every entity from your babysitter on up has authority to deny your flights..

That's a VERY bad bill IMHO. VERY BAD!!

I honestly haven't done much research on the implications of this bill, but Joshua Bardwell (well-known FPV educator if you're unfamiliar) made an interesting comment in his video about the Remote ID NPRM that made it sound like property owners would have to explicitly designate their 0-200' AGL airspace as private property rather than having it be implicit/automatic. Therefore it'd immediately open up the vast majority of the 0-200' airspace to UAS operators rather than immediately shutting it all down. At least if this is the way it goes down I could easily and definitively see where I can and cannot fly and set the right expectations to my clients. He's obviously not a lawyer or lawmaker, but I do hope his interpretation of that law is closer to the truth than what you're describing. ?

 

[BigAl07]

I honestly haven't done much research on the implications of this bill, but Joshua Bardwell (well-known FPV educator if you're unfamiliar) made an interesting comment in his video about the Remote ID NPRM that made it sound like property owners would have to explicitly designate their 0-200' AGL airspace as private property rather than having it be implicit/automatic. Therefore it'd immediately open up the vast majority of the 0-200' airspace to UAS operators rather than immediately shutting it all down. At least if this is the way it goes down I could easily and definitively see where I can and cannot fly and set the right expectations to my clients. He's obviously not a lawyer or lawmaker, but I do hope his interpretation of that law is closer to the truth than what you're describing. ?

You may want to spend the time and read the bill for yourself. It's only 27 pages but it's not an "easy" read so take your time and read it a couple of times.

There are some areas where you can "Request" certain "Special Airspace" (Complex is an example) but unless I missed a page at no point does the property owner have to REQUEST that "Their Airspace" be restricted. Not only does it allow the property owner to control what happens in the airspace over their land it allows local entities to pretty much ban flights except above 200' except you have to be allowed Entrance to the 200' section.

It's a HORRIBLE bill and I honestly seriously doubt it's going to get much traction at all. Hopefully it dies on someones desk a quiet subtle death.

I'm not an attorney (Not even close) but I've been in this industry a loooonngggg time and I can assure you without a doubt that the lawmakers are NOT going to be introducing a Drone Bill that benefits anyone but MONEY MAKERS! Read the bill and look how much it's tailored to Commercial Operations (carriage of goods specifically aka FedEx, Prime, etc).

Drone Integration and Zoning Act | PDF | Unmanned Aerial Vehicle | Federal Government Of The United States

Drone Integration and Zoning Act

www.scribd.com

I think every single one of us should read this and at least be aware of it going forward. It's not gotten any traction yet but it could get some in the blink of an eye.

 

[adm_geomatics]

You may want to spend the time and read the bill for yourself. It's only 27 pages but it's not an "easy" read so take your time and read it a couple of times.

There are some areas where you can "Request" certain "Special Airspace" (Complex is an example) but unless I missed a page at no point does the property owner have to REQUEST that "Their Airspace" be restricted. Not only does it allow the property owner to control what happens in the airspace over their land it allows local entities to pretty much ban flights except above 200' except you have to be allowed Entrance to the 200' section.

It's a HORRIBLE bill and I honestly seriously doubt it's going to get much traction at all. Hopefully it dies on someones desk a quiet subtle death.

I'm not an attorney (Not even close) but I've been in this industry a loooonngggg time and I can assure you without a doubt that the lawmakers are NOT going to be introducing a Drone Bill that benefits anyone but MONEY MAKERS! Read the bill and look how much it's tailored to Commercial Operations (carriage of goods specifically aka FedEx, Prime, etc).

Drone Integration and Zoning Act | PDF | Unmanned Aerial Vehicle | Federal Government Of The United States

Drone Integration and Zoning Act

www.scribd.com

I think every single one of us should read this and at least be aware of it going forward. It's not gotten any traction yet but it could get some in the blink of an eye.

What do you think about HOA's? We have a couple of subdivisions in our area that have specifically "prohibited" drones unless they are for HOA or approved purposes. They even posted signs around their golf courses.

 

[BigAl07]

What do you think about HOA's? We have a couple of subdivisions in our area that have specifically "prohibited" drones unless they are for HOA or approved purposes. They even posted signs around their golf courses.

They can only prohibit launch n landing not over flight.

This bill gives everyone and their brother airspace authority.

 

[adm_geomatics]

They can only prohibit launch n landing not over flight.

This bill gives everyone and their brother airspace authority.

That's what I thought, but I just avoided going there. I had a similar instance with the Texas Department of Transportation where they sent me a specific document about drone use "inside their Right Of Way". That was the key and I explained to them that they had no authority to restrict airspace. In the end they agreed and we are flying as long as I go outside the ROW for my launch point.

 

[BigAl07]

That's what I thought, but I just avoided going there. I had a similar instance with the Texas Department of Transportation where they sent me a specific document about drone use "inside their Right Of Way". That was the key and I explained to them that they had no authority to restrict airspace. In the end they agreed and we are flying as long as I go outside the ROW for my launch point.

Well done.

It's imperitive we make notice of the difference between Airspace Use and Land Use. Restrictions in either one can cripple our efforts.

 

[Mavic Mac]

From THIS article dated August 12, 2019

*********************************

Source: New York City Website

Check out this excerpt from Administrative Code § 10-126 -

“Takeoffs and landings. It shall be unlawful for any person navigating an aircraft to take off or land, except in an emergency, at any place within the limits of the city other than places of landing designated by the department of transportation or the port of New York authority”. This is also known as the NYC "Avigation" law.

**********************************
Also as @LUIS MARTINEZ stated it is not normally best to argue with the police (MHO being a retired LEO also).

Did you have copies of the paperwork granting you permission to fly with you when you spoke to the LEOs ?

Also as @LUIS MARTINEZ stated I would go in person to file the paperwork and get the name and contact info of the person(s) you dealt with

I imagine a "busy Desk Sgt" isn't going to "waste his time" to try and track down your flight permission. Your flight "permission" was probably on the bottom of the totem pole of things he was concerned with.

 

[R Martin]

I honestly haven't done much research on the implications of this bill, but Joshua Bardwell (well-known FPV educator if you're unfamiliar) made an interesting comment in his video about the Remote ID NPRM that made it sound like property owners would have to explicitly designate their 0-200' AGL airspace as private property rather than having it be implicit/automatic. Therefore it'd immediately open up the vast majority of the 0-200' airspace to UAS operators rather than immediately shutting it all down. At least if this is the way it goes down I could easily and definitively see where I can and cannot fly and set the right expectations to my clients. He's obviously not a lawyer or lawmaker, but I do hope his interpretation of that law is closer to the truth than what you're describing. ?

Something he might have missed in the proposal is the remote ID concept that you either commit to their version or you are stripped of the ability to operate in anything other than an FAA designated site. I think that a lot of recreational flyers are going to fall into this category. According to the FAA Facilities map, there is one (1) in north central Texas at the moment and it definitely is not close nor convenient to most people in this area. There may be more added later, but that forces rec pilots to comply and spend hours driving to fly or simply telling the FAA to get stuffed and continue doing what the proposed NPMR is trying to stop.
0-200 feet AGL doesn't impact me at all. I operate at the upper limit. Or at worst case around RBD at 300 feet AGL.How many commercial operators with prosumer aircraft is that going to become a problem? My Inspire could effectively map at a max of 110 feet AGL. Anything above that and the images pixelated so much it was impossible to georeference control points. NPRM is a brain fart. Its the base to be used as a building block to flesh out the details but it is in no way, shape, or form ready to be presented to a third grade class, let alone Congress for approval. In its present state its just an telecom industry grab for power and money at our expense.