Agreed. Even under the old park ordinance, it says “flying,” so it’s questionable if it’d be valid under federal preemption, even if a drone were to fall under the model airplane definition (which I don’t think it would). And State law generally prohibits local government entities from passing new ordinances regulating UASs after April 1, 2017, though it does allow them to regulate takeoffs and landings on government-owned property, as you pointed out, but NOT for commercial operations. So, with a 107 cert and a plan to go take some shots for stock photography (or whatever) I agree it is legal under any possible interpretation. Thanks for the input, and as I said the comment from the Conservancy guy makes me feel better (I was there Saturday with the family but didn’t see any drones around). On the right legal footing or not, I’d rather not have to answer questions from the back seat of a patrol car so it’s good to know it doesn’t sound like they’re out to get us.