Law Question: Can a City Commission arbitrarily make rules regulating Drones without FAA approval?

[Vic Moss]

I try to follow their rules to the best of ability but they do restrict and are unclear in some areas.
What do you think about this?

Drones - Rights and the Federal Aviation Administration. Is the FAA constitutional?

Is the FAA constitutional?

www.bitchute.com

This guy is a [redacted to comply with forums rules]. I got 1:43 into it and I couldn't listen one more second. He is clueless as to how the US Government work. And he's clueless as to how the FAA was formed.

He sounds like anti-government paranoid.

Luckily only 568 people have seen this video. And hopefully all 568 saw through his ignorance and didn't take his opinion as fact. Although it's a little scary that 9 people gave it a Thumbs Up. ?

 

[pjdurham]

Here in Las Vegas, the city put up signs at all the city parks saying unmanned aircraft not allowed. I wrote to the city and got an answer saying there is NO official regulation or ordnance, and for now they are just asking folks not to fly there. City park workers tell those they see with a drone that it is "illegal."

 

[Vic Moss]

Here in Las Vegas, the city put up signs at all the city parks saying unmanned aircraft not allowed. I wrote to the city and got an answer saying there is NO official regulation or ordnance, and for now they are just asking folks not to fly there. City park workers tell those they see with a drone that it is "illegal."

In a situation like, I print out the regs and show them to the cops.

 

[pjdurham]

I carry a copy of the email sent to me from the city.

 

[Heavydpj]

It depends. They may not be able to regulate federal airspace, but they can certainly limit where you physically operate your drone from.

 

[Mike52]

In the small vacation city of Marco Island , Florida ,the city's board of governors has decided that their beaches are off limits to drones. While flying my drone out over the ocean, standing at the water's edge of the beach, a patrol officer told me Marco Island banned drones from their beaches. Before he showed up, I took off from the beach and flew out over the ocean and came back and landed. I didn't fly over any people. There was no indication of recklessness, voyeurism, nuisance, harassment etc etc on my part. I did nothing that could be construed as illegal. He simply said the Board of Governors decided to make a rule or statute banning drones drones from the city's public beaches. So, I was polite, and said, I don't want any trouble and packed it up. Most of the beach goers were mad at the officer for making me leave. They were enjoying watching me fly the drone out over the ocean. I was reading, that any Municipalities trying to govern drones, have to get approval by the FAA? Is this true? I know the municipality can not govern the airspace. This means , I can fly over the beach, but can't land or take off from the beach. Now, I just stand inland and fly the drone from across the street, then cruise around the beach and ocean. It's like drone pilots have to hide themselves, in order to avoid being harassed by local officials. I made the mistake of flying my drone out in the open where everyone could see me. Most people were happy and enjoying it, like someone flying a kite or para sailing. Can cities simply right rules counter to those of the FAA? Who's rules am I supposed to follow?
Here is an excerpt from the Florida State Legislature regarding drones: It states, " ...a political subdivision may not enact or enforce an ordinance or resolution relating to the design, manufacture, testing, maintenance, licensing, registration, certification, or operation of an unmanned aircraft system, including airspace, altitude, flight paths, equipement, or technology requirements; the purpose of operations; and pilot, operator, or observer qualifications, training and certification."
So, both the FAA and the Florida State Legislature are in agreement. What should I do when approached by an official, who says, the city's board decided to make an ordinance restricting unmanned aircraft systems? City governments are just a bunch of local citizens who have no clue what the laws are governing the drone industry. Should I email these people educational materials and current law to educate them?
Let your comments and insights fly !

Do you have any updates on this? I’m headed down to Marco in July and wondering if I should bring my Mini 2.

 

[ATW]

How about sitting on a nearby bench, stand in a parking lot, sidewalk, trail, something that gets you physically off the beach? Some guy driving a lawn mower in a park, told me I wasn't allowed to fly from there, so i walked to the sidewalk, and did it from there. Another time I sat down on a bench, and flew from there, and both times it was fine to do so.

 

[JayTea26]

In AZ we have a state law that prohibits anyone or entity in AZ but the state from making regulating drone flight. It encompasses all but NFS and Reservation lands... as both of these are Federal.

I carry a copy of the law with me just in case.

I live in AZ. Can you give me a copy of the law?

 

[iaincaradoc]

I live in AZ. Can you give me a copy of the law?

https://azleg.gov/legtext/52leg/2r/bills/sb1449p.pdf is the one you want.

 

[Mountain Man]

In a nut shell, No! If the posted rule states no To/L from entity property and you are standing on entity’s property, then NO! Hand launch/retrieve is in violation of entity’s laws. If you wish to test this, please go to your nearest NP and stand in front of the ranger office, then hand launch. The exacting answer should quickly become apparent. What you may wish to actually do, is to petition the municipality for a UAS enjoyment area. Offer STEM lessons to neighborhood schools. Seek other avenues to display proper UAS airmenship responsibilities.
Above all, always fly safe, legal, and responsibly.

Really, it seems we are trying to split hairs here. Why try to circumvent any law to try to get our own way. Why argue with law enforcement? Why try to create so much challenge? I understand ammendment rights, etc. But local authorities often have to enact more laws to prevent people from doing stupid things. There was a comedian that once said, "You can't fix stupid." NC requires you to have a permit to fly anywhere in the state, which includes private property. However, it is very simple to get, costs nothing, you simply "update" your permit (no further test required after initial knowledge, which is very simple) and go about your business. We live in such a litigious it seems simpler to follow the rules instead of doing something "stupid" that just makes it more difficult for everyone else.

 

[SunView]

There is an article dated July 6 2021in the Naples Daily News stating:

“We need to create an ordinance to protect their airspace and the intrusion of drones into their private property," Rios – who lives at the Belize and is the president of the homeowners’ board – said at the May 2 city council meeting.

Marco Island Police Department Chief Al Schettino reminded the councilors that the FAA has jurisdiction over airspace, limiting local law enforcement's ability to enforce an ordinance. The City Council voted against the ordinance 6-1.

Any thoughts?Oh BTW check out my video from Marco Island's Tiger Tail Beach.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[blabel75]

Really, it seems we are trying to split hairs here. Why try to circumvent any law to try to get our own way. Why argue with law enforcement? Why try to create so much challenge? I understand ammendment rights, etc. But local authorities often have to enact more laws to prevent people from doing stupid things. There was a comedian that once said, "You can't fix stupid." NC requires you to have a permit to fly anywhere in the state, which includes private property. However, it is very simple to get, costs nothing, you simply "update" your permit (no further test required after initial knowledge, which is very simple) and go about your business. We live in such a litigious it seems simpler to follow the rules instead of doing something "stupid" that just makes it more difficult for everyone else.

The thing is, in Florida state law provides that local governments are not legally permitted to enact their own laws related to drone use. Isn't it as simple as that?

NC also only requires a permit for non recreational use. Though as we now know, very few drone flights are truly recreational.

 

[lookout]

The State of Florida has pre-empted the power to regulate unmanned aircraft systems to itself. See section 320.41, Florida Statutes. (2020).

Statutes & Constitution :View Statutes : Online Sunshine

Subsection (3)(b) of that statute states:

”(b) Except as otherwise expressly provided, a political subdivision may not enact or enforce an ordinance or resolution relating to the design, manufacture, testing, maintenance, licensing, registration, certification, or operation of an unmanned aircraft system, including airspace, altitude, flight paths, equipment or technology requirements; the purpose of operations; and pilot, operator, or observer qualifications, training, and certification.” (Emphasis added)

Subsection (2)(c) of the statute defines “unmanned aircraft system“ as
follows:
“Unmanned aircraft system” means a drone and its associated elements, including communication links and the components used to control the drone which are required for the pilot in command to operate the drone safely and efficiently.

Thus, a political subdivision may not regulate the “operation“ of an “unmannehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y6onONuUjM4d aircraft system,“ including the “components used to control the drone,” (i.e., the remote control.)

Now, there are some exceptions to this prohibition. (3)(c) provides:

“(c) This subsection does not limit the authority of a local government to enact or enforce local ordinances relating to nuisances, voyeurism, harassment, reckless endangerment, property damage, or other illegal acts arising from the use of unmanned aircraft systems if such laws or ordinances are not specifically related to the use of an unmanned aircraft system for those illegal acts.”

In other words, you can’t do anything with a drone that would be illegal without a drone.

Obviously, you can’t just ignore this ordinance or you’re going to get arrested. You might want to write to or meet with your city commissioner and politely show him or her the statute and see if he or she would sponsor a repeal. It’s possible that the ordinance predates the effective date of the statute (July 1, 2017) or that the city didn’t know about it when the ordinance was enacted.

Which is why they just need to amend existing laws to include drones instead of trying to take the authority away or modify what the FAA has the authority over. But that's not how cities with pants bigger than their bum can hold up want to operate.

The other part is the cities don't seem to be able to remember that they can enforce laws above their jurisdiction...oops did I pun?

 

[baddog]

I'm not sure where you got that information, but you're wrong.

With the exception of very few parks (Grand Canyon being one), there is no FAA prohibition about flying UAS over lands and waters under NPS control. This is a common misconception.

We are free to fly over the parks from outside if we follow all FAA regulations.

(Understanding Drone Regulations in National Parks, Forests and Wilderness Areas)

The NPS issued Policy Memorandum 14-05, on June 19, 2014. It was issued as interim policy, but it is still in force with very few exceptions according to the NPS webpage. This policy prohibits launching, landing, and operation of unmanned aircraft on lands and waters administered by NPS, including National Parks, National Monuments, National Recreation Areas, National Historic Sites, National Seashores, National Memorials, and others. These sites are shown in the Kittyhawk app and B4UFLY app as locations where drone flights are clearly prohibited.

Some drone operators have tried to get around these regulations by taking off from private property and flying over NPS lands and waters. Even if you do not launch, land, or operate from NPS-administered lands and waters, the NPS could apply regulations about wildlife disturbance, nuisance or disorderly conduct, or operating a motor vehicle to your drone flight regardless of where you launch and land. In addition to any posted regulations, you still must follow all FAA regulations for UAS operations, such as keeping your drone within visual line of sight.

 

[Vic Moss]

Some drone operators have tried to get around these regulations by taking off from private property and flying over NPS lands and waters. Even if you do not launch, land, or operate from NPS-administered lands and waters, the NPS could apply regulations about wildlife disturbance, nuisance or disorderly conduct, or operating a motor vehicle to your drone flight regardless of where you launch and land. In addition to any posted regulations, you still must follow all FAA regulations for UAS operations, such as keeping your drone within visual line of sight.

Yes, this is accurate. I’ve done this very thing. Even the NPS says it isn’t forbidden in their UAS FAQ page.

 

[lookout]

Really, it seems we are trying to split hairs here. Why try to circumvent any law to try to get our own way. Why argue with law enforcement? Why try to create so much challenge? I understand ammendment rights, etc. But local authorities often have to enact more laws to prevent people from doing stupid things. There was a comedian that once said, "You can't fix stupid." NC requires you to have a permit to fly anywhere in the state, which includes private property. However, it is very simple to get, costs nothing, you simply "update" your permit (no further test required after initial knowledge, which is very simple) and go about your business. We live in such a litigious it seems simpler to follow the rules instead of doing something "stupid" that just makes it more difficult for everyone else.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Cw4bray]

This is what the mostly democrat run municipalities are using, to circumvent the FAA - and it seems to be working.
Home rule in the United States - Wikipedia).

 

[spudster]

This is what the mostly democrat run municipalities are using, to circumvent the FAA - and it seems to be working.
Home rule in the United States - Wikipedia).

Proof it is mostly democratic run municipalities?

 

[bobscheel53]

The municipality can still fine you or even arrest you for flying over their beach.. But if you choose to fight either, you'll win, because their "regulation" is invalid and unenforceable. But fighting the city may cost you far more in the end. As Rousseau famously said, "....I have never been ruined but twice. Once when I lost a suit, and once when I won...". That said, you legally CAN fly over the beach--only FAA can say otherwise. Federal sovereignty trumps any city, county or state law. A city can, however, ban take-off and landing on city-owned or managed land. The city of Seattle did just that.

If you purchased a legal representation policy, then flew and got ticketed or arrested you could fight it and most likely win. I know AMA members get an insurance policy, but I believe it may only cover liability.

 

[RoboticTundra]

A bit of journalist perspective... Many and probably most people on city, borough, parish and county councils and boards along with many or most law enforcement are not overly intelligent, often have a surprisingly poor understanding of our legal system, and even more surprising do not understand laws even when they are reading the actual law (and FWIW, I've struggled to understand many laws when I'm reading them).

This is not to take away from the many hard working and effective-for-good people in all of these. Just because you work with a bunch of turkeys doesn't mean you are one. One of my best friends is a sheriffs deputy and the stories he tells about some of the folks he works with are scary.

Citizens frequently challenge things, at the incident and in court, and win. This is one of the only ways to keep gov't in check and is how our constitution and justice system are designed. If you know you are in the right legally and ethically and are not endangering anyone then consider taking up the challenge.