Celina drone regs grounded

CELINA - Council members are going back to the drawing board to draft regulations for unmanned aerial vehicles or drones.

Celina City Council on Monday night unanimously repealed a recently enacted policy, which banned the use of drones in town, because of discrepancies between the ordinance and an attached exhibit that details enforcement.

No consensus was reached among council members on which replacement policy to advance.

"We've got to repeal the ordinance that we passed at the last council meeting," councilman Jeff Larmore said. "The ordinance was amended but did not match the attachment A that was supposed to police it for the permitting process."

Council members suspended the three public reading rules and passed the repeal legislation as an emergency measure, taking effect immediately.

After the regular council meeting, the committee of the whole met to discuss a possible replacement ordinance and to allow the numerous attendees - remote-control aircraft enthusiasts from within and outside Celina - to offer input.

Councilman Fred LeJeune said his concern is the safety of drone flights.

"Many of the package instruction inserts for drone devices actually state that this is not designed to fly around populated areas," he said. "My concern is someone who has a small property trying to fly some heavy device straight up in the air 400 feet. It may be difficult to maneuver and that's heavily documented as far as people learning how to use these devices on their properties and they become lost or out of control."

The proposed replacement ordinance discussed by council is similar to the repealed ordinance. One of the few changes would increase the allowable size of drones to be permitted to fly on private property. The maximum weight was increased from 3 ounces to 8 ounces to allow more toy-like drones to be used by children.

It would ban the flight of drones weighing more than 8 ounces in any airspace within the city limits, except by law enforcement or government agencies.

The newly proposed ordinance would not prohibit the flight of drones inside buildings, allowing the Celina Flying Sportsmen to continue flying aircraft inside the local Lutheran church.

"If anybody is inside a building this ordinance doesn't apply to them," mayor Jeff Hazel said. "So if they're in a recreational room, multipurpose room, as long as they're inside that building, it doesn't have any impact outside."

The proposed ordinance also would require individuals 18 or older, businesses and nonprofit entities to seek written permission to use drones over 8 ounces within Celina limits by safety service director Tom Hitchcock and police chief Tom Wale, who would have joint discretion to grant or deny permission.

Not everybody was on board with the proposed ordinance. Councilmen Bill Sell and Jason King said they wanted to revert to a previously proposed ordinance that would have banned the flight of drones over city-owned property, but not private property as long as permission was obtained from the owner.

"I think that original ordinance needs to be re-examined again because I think this one here, it's OK, but it's difficult," Sell said.

King said he agreed with Sell.

"I think we've overreached on this," King said. "The original (ordinance) basically tells us exactly what we can and cannot do and does not restrict me on my own property. If I have an acre inside of town, I can fly and do what I want on my own property. That's my right to do that."

Celina Flying Sports Club Vice President Tom Saddler and numerous other remote-control aircraft enthusiasts spoke out against restrictions on drone activity over private property, noting the benefits of drones for commercial, recreational and educational applications.

Saddler and Larmore sparred at times over the scope of possible drone restrictions on private property. The reason why so many people were in attendance, Saddler said, was because some council members are trying to control what people do on their private property.

"That is totally unpopular," he said, noting most of the people he's talked to can't believe council is trying to ban the use of drones on private property. "Why would you pass a law that you have no intention of enforcing or you have no ability to enforce? And if it's complaint-driven, I might be next door and the neighbor doesn't like me, he complains and I might get arrested."

Council should focus on restricting drone flights over large crowds at public events, Saddler said.

Larmore said he has received support from people such as medical professionals worried the devices could interfere with emergency medical helicopters, who agree drones need to be restricted.

"These are the type of things I hear. I can probably go out and match your 100 people. Maybe what it needs to be is on the ballot. Then we'd really know what the whole population (thinks)," Larmore said. "I don't know if I quite agree that the whole town is OK with this type of weight flying over their houses, and we do regulate people on private property a lot. We tell them they can't shoot firearms in town; you can't have grass over a certain height."

Council members did not schedule another meeting to specifically discuss drones. The next regular council meeting is 7 p.m. Dec. 14 on the second floor of the city administration building.