As the dispatcher gathered information, the county police’s Air Control Unit listened in. With a couple of clicks, a target was created and a drone launched skyward from the tallest building in Wheaton, well before any officer could be briefed. As it pushed through its short route, the drone held its stare toward the horizon.
It wasn’t until the unmanned aircraft crossed over the scene that its view jolted toward the ground in search of the suspect. That feature, police said, came from one of many conversations between them and the public.
Since 2019, dozens, if not hundreds, of law enforcement agencies across the country have adopted similar Drone as First Responder (DFR) programs, using the technology to put eyes on a situation sooner and, sometimes, in a clearer way.
But as drones reach more areas, including Baltimore County, concerns over privacy and surveillance often follow.
“We base a lot of what we do on transparency, community input, and that’s kind of why we’ve had success,” Special Operations Lt. Ed Drew said. “We’re not trying to be tricky about it, any of this stuff. Everything is made public.”
Jay Stanley, a senior policy analyst with the ACLU’s Speech, Privacy and Technology Project, has urged lawmakers for years to issue guardrails for DFR programs. Daring success stories may justify a program’s beginning, but Stanley said with expansions and new uses, “it’s important not to make policies based on anecdotes.”
“You don’t want a world where, from the minute you walk out of your front door in the morning until you get home at night, you’re constantly aware that there are flying robotic police cameras … that could be focused on you at any time,” Stanley told The Baltimore Sun. “You have no way of knowing. That’s just not a way for free people to live.”
Similar to Montgomery County, which began its DFR program in 2023 and now hosts demonstrations for agencies along the East Coast, Baltimore County Police has collected public input before drafting policies.
The department’s first of three information sessions took place last month in Dundalk. Though only around two dozen people attended, most in the crowd engaged with the presentation, asking questions and seeking clarification on privacy and efficacy.
Spokesperson Joy Stewart said Friday that the department “has been encouraged by the overwhelming support” shown for the program ahead of its planned rollout this fall.
“Open dialogue between the Department and residents is essential in building trust in the DFR program,” she said, adding the policy’s approval is “an internal process.”
Baltimore County Police officials said they referred to Montgomery County’s program when considering whether to start their own, as well as a pioneering agency in southern California. Their plan and model includes several points of data, all accessible to the public, including average response times, the kinds of calls taken and the number of times they were first to respond to a scene — 68% in Montgomery County.
Flight maps and descriptions are also available for review. Thursday’s call for service at the Wheaton liquor store, for instance, read, “Call for male with a knife. [Drone] responded and was unable to locate any suspects.”
Transparent information helps push past law enforcement’s “theoretical talk” to find the “big picture,” Stanley said, and evaluate whether drones are worth their social and financial tolls. In Baltimore County, for instance, officials said the drones will cost about $15,000 each, with funds coming from traffic camera violations, while police in Montgomery County said the equipment can cost much more.
“The police will say that this is a way for them to extend their capabilities. It’ll be a force multiplier,” Stanley said. “Well, just how much police force do we want multiplied?”
Nationally, regulation changes by the Federal Aviation Administration have guided the trajectory of police drones over the past decade. A 400-foot limit, for instance, dictates the maximum altitude at which pedestrian and police drones can fly. And for the most part, users cannot operate a drone “beyond their visual line of sight,” though Stanley said it’s now much easier for police to be exempted from that requirement.
Montgomery County’s proximity to the Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport requires someone to watch police flights at three of the department’s four drone locations, according to Sergeant Pat Kepp, one of only two full-time members in its Air Control Unit . But the department has received a waiver for the line of sight rule at lower altitudes, he said, a change that will not only affect the active drone in Gaithersburg, but several future sites still in the works.
The sergeant said the next step for their DFR program is to install unmanned docks in new areas, charging stations that will allow police to operate “everything autonomously.”
County data shows that the most common calls drones respond to involve theft or larceny and suspicious circumstances, persons or vehicles. The docks, in more places without lookouts, will allow police to get to more calls — a requirement for every flight.
“It’s got to have a law enforcement mission. It’s got to have some call for service related to it,” Kepp said. “And this goes for everything … it’s got to have a purpose.”
Since 2016, as surveillance technologies have become more prevalent, the ACLU has looked to empower residents and their representatives in the decisions of how and if the technology is used. In that time, 26 jurisdictions have adopted “Community Control Over Police Surveillance” laws, many of which are in California and Massachusetts, though none in Maryland.
Baltimore County and Montgomery County officials have said they will share updates to their programs with the public, though there are few, if any, requirements for them to do so.
Procedurally, but also with limited inventory and battery life, their DFR programs are not designed to act as a constant surveillance tool. Case law rooted in Maryland over the Baltimore Police Department’s undisclosed “spy plane” has determined that pervasive aerial surveillance is unconstitutional.
Even so, Kepp said Thursday that residents in some Montgomery County communities, which have been hit with high rates of theft and break-ins, have asked for more consistent service.
Drew, the lieutenant, said with a policy change “at that level,” the department would contact the Montgomery County Council and begin hearing from constituents again.
“If we wanted to, we could go say that we’re going to do that,” Kepp said. “We just know that’s not the best way to do it. We want to have the buy-in … It’s easier to keep the goodwill that we have going, and work with everybody to have the policy change.”
©2025 Baltimore Sun, Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
