City Council voted unanimously Aug. 7 to adopt the policy, spelling out acceptable and unacceptable uses of drones for city government purposes, including aerial surveillance by the Ann Arbor Police Department and collection of video footage.
While drones already are regulated by the Federal Aviation Administration, the city policy institutes additional requirements and considerations that apply to city employees, third-party providers, consultants and volunteers.
People’s privacy rights must be prioritized and drone operators must avoid inadvertently recording or transmitting images of areas where there is a reasonable expectation of privacy such as someone’s backyard, absent a warrant or exigent circumstances, according to the policy.
People have a reasonable expectation of not being subjected to prolonged aerial surveillance or being followed by drones, even in public areas, for significant periods of time, the policy states.
Council Member Jenn Cornell, D-5th Ward, asked what’s considered a significant period of time, saying that wording seems ambiguous.
There’s no legal definition, but that language was suggested by the ACLU, Senior Assistant City Attorney Jennifer Janetsky said, acknowledging people may have different opinions about what constitutes a significant period.
That ambiguity will give residents flexibility to raise a legal issue if they think a drone has been in use too long, City Attorney Atleen Kaur said, saying some residents might think five minutes is a significant period and others might think it’s OK.
Council Member Ayesha Ghazi Edwin, D-3rd Ward, asked if following a random person would be a policy violation.
“We have specifically written in protections to ensure that the drones are not used in that way,” Janetsky said. “It’s the intention of the AAPD, which has been clearly stated by our chief and supported by our chief, that it will be used for limited purposes such as finding missing persons.”
An active hostage situation or incident that requires overhead surveillance to be able to get people or police in and out safely is another example when a drone can be used, she said.
“It will not be used for surveillance in the sense of running through Ann Arbor at random,” she said.
The city’s service area administrators are required under the policy to appoint a coordinator to manage drone use, maintaining a list of authorized drone operators and ensuring the policy is followed. The policy lists many instances when drones can be used for monitoring, including to inspect roads, bridges, utility lines, water towers and other infrastructure.
They also can be used to collect topographic survey data, review green spaces and wetlands, monitor solar panels and traffic flow, aid in disaster or fire response and rescues on the Huron River, and to capture footage to promote city events and festivals or to make content explaining city services and operations.
Any footage or data collected will not be shared with outside entities without consent of the city, unless required by law, the policy states.
Some unacceptable uses of drones outlined in the policy include conducting personal business, deploying weapons and harassing, intimidating or discriminating against anyone solely based on their personal characteristics. Also not allowed: surveillance in a geographic area “in an effort to capture crime in progress without cause to suspect that a crime is occurring, or about to occur, in the area being surveilled.”
“Any aerial observation mission to further a felony criminal investigation requires that it be conducted in a manner consistent with the law, including the possible use of a search warrant or search warrant exception, when required,” it states.
Ghazi Edwin thanked her 3rd Ward council colleague Travis Radina, who brought the issue to the council table in May, and others who worked on the policy, including ACLU members and other advocates.
“All of them really worked collaboratively and deliberately to address the privacy and constitutional concerns that often accompany surveillance-related technologies,” she said.
Ghazi Edwin said there are needed uses of drones, but she had some reservations and residents also are concerned about privacy. She’s committed to ensuring those concerns are addressed, she said.
She won support for an amendment to require the city administrator to report back in six months on how drones are being used and if any additional protections should be considered.
Council Member Cynthia Harrison, D-1st Ward, thanked those who worked on the policy to put community trust and data integrity first, calling it a dedication to responsible governance in a rapidly evolving digital age.
“In an era when third-party platforms are quietly sharing sensitive data without warrants or clear consent, our choice to host footage internally is both a technical decision and a civil liberty safeguard,” she said. “It protects our first responders from unintended misuse and shields residents from exploitation by AI systems or opaque surveillance practices.”
Council Member Dharma Akmon, D-4th Ward, said there was a drone flying around her neighborhood recently.
“It was going into different yards, and you start wondering, what the heck is this drone?” she said.
For the sake of transparency, she suggested exploring setting up an online dashboard showing drone activity.
©2025 Advance Local Media LLC. Visit mlive.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
