Local park violating state law (article)

[Lapeer20m]

This is a great article that highlights Genesee County Parks defiance of state law.

Parks commission plays it safe on legality of drones | Davison Index

 

[JSKCKNIT]

Thanks for posting this. Been following your posts. Glad you guys are fighting back.

 

[Lapeer20m]

Thanks for posting this. Been following your posts. Glad you guys are fighting back.

It’s strange to me. After listening to a few of the board members, I feel most have no strong opinions about drones. That’s what makes it so bizarre that they won’t just fix the issue.

 

[Thomas B]

Likely they are waiting on public comments. So all local drone operators in the area need to contact them to preserve our ability to fly. If the council ordinance prevails it will become a legal precident for all types of entities to restrict drones unnecessarily.

 

[JMagnus]

I'm very new to all of this so I may be way off track here, but I thought the FAA was the only entity allowed to restrict air space. If I'm correct, how does a local entity feel it can do so? Am I missing something important here?? I'm just trying to get a handle on all of this. Thanks!

 

[Lapeer20m]

I'm very new to all of this so I may be way off track here, but I thought the FAA was the only entity allowed to restrict air space. If I'm correct, how does a local entity feel it can do so? Am I missing something important here?? I'm just trying to get a handle on all of this. Thanks!

You are correct. My understanding is that Only the faa can regulate airspace. However, the faa does allow locals to restrict takeoff and landing.

The State of Michigan enacted a preemption statute that prohibits local units of government from enacting or enforcing any rules regarding the possession or operation of unmanned aircraft. The county has absolutely no authority to regulate unmanned aircraft, including takeoff and landing.

 

[JMagnus]

You are correct. My understanding is that Only the faa can regulate airspace. However, the faa does allow locals to restrict takeoff and landing.

The State of Michigan enacted a preemption statute that prohibits local units of government from enacting or enforcing any rules regarding the possession or operation of unmanned aircraft. The county has absolutely no authority to regulate unmanned aircraft, including takeoff and landing.

Thank you for the clarification!

 

[deleted member 877]

You are correct. My understanding is that Only the faa can regulate airspace. However, the faa does allow locals to restrict takeoff and landing.

The State of Michigan enacted a preemption statute that prohibits local units of government from enacting or enforcing any rules regarding the possession or operation of unmanned aircraft. The county has absolutely no authority to regulate unmanned aircraft, including takeoff and landing.

Sorry if I missed it in another thread but where are you at in terms of any legal action against you? Are you totally free and clear?

Also did you get your drone and everything else they confiscated back?

 

[Lapeer20m]

Sorry if I missed it in another thread but where are you at in terms of any legal action against you? Are you totally free and clear?

Also did you get your drone and everything else they confiscated back?

Great questions.

The prosecutor refused to authorize the charge, so the case against me was dropped. It appears the prosecutor doesn’t believe the park can regulate drones.

It took just over one month, but All of my property was returned in good working condition.

Now my focus is on getting the park to respect state law. I am hopeful they will simply comply because it’s the correct thing to do, but we have a few different strategies we can employ utilizing the courts if necessary.

The state also has a division of the DOT, the aeronautical commission, which among other things, is tasked with making sure local governments comply with state aviation regulations, including uas. I know a guy who previously served on the commission and he has contacted the chairman. I am hopeful they will choose to pursue this issue.

 

[deleted member 877]

Great questions.

The prosecutor refused to authorize the charge, so the case against me was dropped. It appears the prosecutor doesn’t believe the park can regulate drones.

It took just over one month, but All of my property was returned in good working condition.

Now my focus is on getting the park to respect state law. I am hopeful they will simply comply because it’s the correct thing to do, but we have a few different strategies we can employ utilizing the courts if necessary.

The state also has a division of the DOT, the aeronautical commission, which among other things, is tasked with making sure local governments comply with state aviation regulations, including uas. I know a guy who previously served on the commission and he has contacted the chairman. I am hopeful they will choose to pursue this issue.

Firstly let me add my voice to those who support what you are doing – I have been a fan since you started the thread (now closed) about your unfortunate experience with the Park police.

I believe that by now the vast majority of responsible law-abiding recreational drone pilots are being extra careful in terms of how they are perceived by the general public when flying their drones. At the moment it’s especially important while the FAA is drafting new regulations – we want to avoid giving them any ammunition that could be used against us.

On the other hand I also firmly believe that it’s just as important for local authorities to follow the letter of the law and not be allowed to get away with thumbing their noses at their Legislative superiors.

I enthusiastically supported your proposal to stage a fly-in at the park not because I want to see the local authority bend the knee but because, if done the right way with Respect and Education as the key themes, an event like that would present a totally positive showcase for our endeavour.