Celina council drone debate takes off

CELINA - City council members may soon revisit a decades-old policy prohibiting the flight of objects in city parks after learning a small drone was hovering above the Freedom Days festival this summer.

City safety service director Tom Hitchcock told council members this week about the drone, asking them if they want to allow the devices - known as unmanned aircrafts - on city property.

The park ordinance in question was approved in 1980.

"At Freedom Days did anyone see the drones that were flying in the air taking pictures of the fireworks?" Hitchcock asked. "Our ordinances prohibit that. So we had somebody wanting to do the drones at the (Grand Lake) Marathon but we had to tell them no. Is that something that council wants to do, not want to do?"

A small drone was flying 30 to 40 feet in the air taking pictures of concerts and the fireworks during Freedom Days in July at Lake Shore Park, Celina Mayor Jeff Hazel told the newspaper.

The mayor did not reveal the name of the company but said it was a St. Marys photography business taking pictures for Freedom Days at no cost.

"They were doing it for free for advertising for future events," Hitchcock told council members.

The city received several complaints about the drone, Hazel said.

According to the Federal Aviation Administration, unmanned aircraft, regardless of whether the operation is for recreational, hobby, business or commercial purposes, are considered aircraft and subject to FAA regulation.

Council members Jeff Larmore and Fred LeJeune agreed they don't want drones on city property at this time.

"With the newness of this and the big boom of the activity, you don't know if there's any nefarious reason behind it. You don't know if they're photographing children and so forth," LeJeune said, adding he supports the status quo.

Larmore said he has concerns about people having the proper certification and know-how to operate a drone.

"You know, you've got a big crowd down there and all of a sudden this thing drops out of the sky or they crash into somebody. That's what I would be concerned about," Larmore said.

Councilman June Scott pointed out a drone hit the Space Needle at Seattle, closing it down.

"You know, when this original ordinance was passed, the technology probably wasn't there ... we're going to have to address this eventually," Scott said.

As technology improves and the price of drones falls, the aircraft could soon be flying down Main Street, councilman Bill Sell said.

"Currently our ordinances prohibit any type of flying device over city property," Hitchcock replied to Sell.

The language in the park ordinance pertaining to flying objects was probably included because of people flying kites, Hitchcock said.

Sell asked if the ordinance prohibits a child from using a remote-controlled flying device in his yard.

"I know kids can buy those things and they can get them 20 to 30 feet off the ground just with the battery-powered ones," Sell said.

"In his own backyard, he's not (violating the ordinance)," Hitchcock said. "It's just on city property. They can fly them on private property all they want but they can't do it on city property."

Council President Jason King said people fly remote-control helicopters at Westview Park.

"Yeah, I know," Hitchcock said. "Technically kites are kind of against our ordinance out at the parks. I'm assuming back then they did it because somebody got hit by one. Because it would hurt if you got hit by one of those little helicopters flying in our city park."

Council members agreed to review the ordinance.

"It's probably a good ordinance to look at because it also prohibits anybody hitting golf balls out in the parks ... throwing anything except in a designated area," Hitchcock said.

He also noted litigation is ongoing about the legality of drones.

Late last month, model aircraft hobbyists, research universities and commercial drone interests filed lawsuits in federal court challenging a government directive they say imposes tough new limits on the use of model aircraft and broadens the agency's ban on commercial drone flights.

The three lawsuits ask the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia to review the validity of the directive, which the FAA issued in June. The agency said the directive is an attempt to clarify what is a model aircraft and the limitations on their operation.

The FAA has been working on regulations that would permit commercial drone flights in U.S. skies for more than 10 years, but the agency is still at least months and possibly years away from issuing final rules to permit flights by small drones. Regulations for flights by larger drones are even further away.

Part of the agency's challenge is to distinguish between planes flown by hobbyists and those used for commercial applications, a distinction that's become harder to draw as the technology for model planes has grown more sophisticated.

A law passed by Congress in 2012 directed the FAA to issue regulations permitting commercial drone flights by the fall of 2015, but prohibited the agency from imposing new regulations on model aircraft.

- The Associated Press contributed to this story.