Existing federal law, the Federal Aviation Administration Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, provides for the integration of civil unmanned aircraft systems, commonly known as drones, into the national airspace system by September 30, 2015. Existing federal law requires the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration to develop and implement operational and certification requirements for the operation of public unmanned aircraft systems in the national airspace system by December 31, 2015.

Existing law provides that a person who comes into any school building or upon any school ground, or adjacent street, sidewalk, or public way, whose presence or acts interfere with or disrupt a school activity, without lawful business, or who remains after having been asked to leave, as specified, is guilty of a misdemeanor. Existing law also makes it a crime to possess a firearm within 1,000 feet of a public or private school providing instruction in kindergarten or grades 1 to 12, inclusive, or to possess specified knives or blades on the grounds of those schools.

This bill would, unless authorized by federal law, make it an infraction to knowingly and intentionally operate an unmanned aircraft or unmanned aircraft system on the grounds of, or less than 350 feet above ground level within the airspace overlaying, a public school providing instruction in kindergarten or grades 1 to 12, inclusive, during school hours and without the written permission of the school principal or higher authority, or his or her designee, or equivalent school authority. The bill would also, unless authorized by federal law, make it an infraction to knowingly and intentionally use an unmanned aircraft or unmanned aircraft system to capture images of public school grounds providing instruction in kindergarten or grades 1 to 12, inclusive, during school hours and without the written permission of the school principal or higher authority, or his or her designee, or equivalent school authority. The bill would define school hours for its purposes as during any school session, extracurricular activity, or event sponsored by or participated in by the school, and the one-hour periods immediately preceding and following any session, activity, or event. The bill would provide for a warning for a first violation and a fine of no more than $200 for each subsequent violation. The bill would exempt from its provisions any publisher, editor, reporter, or other specified persons, unless the principal or the principals designee has requested that the person cease the operation of the unmanned aircraft or unmanned aircraft system on the basis that the operation of the unmanned aircraft or unmanned aircraft system would be disruptive of, or interfere with, classes of the public school program. The bill would also exempt law enforcement from its provisions. The bill would exempt from its provisions any entity for which the Federal Aviation Administration has authorized the use of an unmanned aircraft or unmanned aircraft system if that unmanned aircraft or unmanned aircraft system is operated in accordance with the terms and conditions of that authorization. By creating new crimes, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing federal law, the Federal Aviation Administration Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, provides for the integration of civil unmanned aircraft systems, commonly known as drones, into the national airspace system by September 30, 2015. Existing federal law requires the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration to develop and implement operational and certification requirements for the operation of public unmanned aircraft systems in the national airspace system by December 31, 2015.

Existing law provides that a person who comes into any school building or upon any school ground, or adjacent street, sidewalk, or public way, whose presence or acts interfere with or disrupt a school activity, without lawful business, or who remains after having been asked to leave, as specified, is guilty of a misdemeanor. Existing law also makes it a crime to possess a firearm within 1,000 feet of a public or private school providing instruction in kindergarten or grades 1 to 12, inclusive, or to possess specified knives or blades on the grounds of those schools.

This bill would, unless authorized by federal law, make it an infraction to knowingly and intentionally operate an unmanned aircraft or unmanned aircraft system on the grounds of, or less than 350 feet above ground level within the airspace overlaying, a public school providing instruction in kindergarten or grades 1 to 12, inclusive, during school hours and without the written permission of the school principal or higher authority, or his or her designee, or equivalent school authority. The bill would also, unless authorized by federal law, make it an infraction to knowingly and intentionally use an unmanned aircraft or unmanned aircraft system to capture images of public school grounds providing instruction in kindergarten or grades 1 to 12, inclusive, during school hours and without the written permission of the school principal or higher authority, or his or her designee, or equivalent school authority. The bill would define school hours for its purposes as during any school session, extracurricular activity, or event sponsored by or participated in by the school, and the one-hour periods immediately preceding and following any session, activity, or event. The bill would provide for a warning for a first violation and a fine of no more than $200 for each subsequent violation. The bill would exempt from its provisions any publisher, editor, reporter, or other person connected with or employed by a newspaper, magazine, or other periodical publication engaged in gathering, receiving, or processing information for communication to the public, a radio or television station, or by a press association or wire service, specified persons, unless the principal or the principals designee has requested that the person cease the operation of the unmanned aircraft or unmanned aircraft system on the basis that the operation of the unmanned aircraft or unmanned aircraft system would be disruptive of, or interfere with, classes of the public school program. The bill would also exempt law enforcement from its provisions. The bill would exempt from its provisions any entity for which the Federal Aviation Administration has authorized the use of an unmanned aircraft or unmanned aircraft system if that unmanned aircraft or unmanned aircraft system is operated in accordance with the terms and conditions of that authorization. By creating new crimes, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing federal law, the Federal Aviation Administration Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, provides for the integration of civil unmanned aircraft systems, commonly known as drones, into the national airspace system by September 30, 2015. Existing federal law requires the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration to develop and implement operational and certification requirements for the operation of public unmanned aircraft systems in the national airspace system by December 31, 2015.

Existing law provides that a person who comes into any school building or upon any school ground, or adjacent street, sidewalk, or public way, whose presence or acts interfere with or disrupt a school activity, without lawful business, or who remains after having been asked to leave, as specified, is guilty of a misdemeanor. Existing law also makes it a crime to possess a firearm within 1,000 feet of a public or private school providing instruction in kindergarten or grades 1 to 12, inclusive, or to possess specified knives or blades on the grounds of those schools.

This bill would, unless authorized by federal law, make it an infraction to knowingly and intentionally operate an unmanned aircraft system on the grounds of, or less than 350 feet above ground level within the airspace overlaying, a public school providing instruction in kindergarten or grades 1 to 12, inclusive, during school hours and without the written permission of the school principal or higher authority, or his or her designee, or equivalent school authority. The bill would also, unless authorized by federal law, make it an infraction to knowingly and intentionally use an unmanned aircraft system to capture images of public school grounds providing instruction in kindergarten or grades 1 to 12, inclusive, during school hours and without the written permission of the school principal or higher authority, or his or her designee, or equivalent school authority. The bill would define school hours for its purposes as during any school session, extracurricular activity, or event sponsored by or participated in by the school, and the one-hour periods immediately preceding and following any session, activity, or event. The bill would provide for a warning for a first violation and a fine of no more than $200 for each subsequent violation. The bill would exempt from its provisions any publisher, editor, reporter, or other person connected with or employed by a newspaper, magazine, or other periodical publication, publication engaged in gathering, receiving, or processing information for communication to the public, a radio or television station, or by a press association or wire service, unless the principal or the principals designee has requested that the person cease the operation of the unmanned aircraft system on the basis that the operation of the unmanned aircraft system would be disruptive of, or interfere with, classes of the public school program. The bill would also exempt law enforcement from its provisions. By creating new crimes, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law federal law, the Federal Aviation Administration Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, provides for the integration of civil unmanned aircraft systems, commonly known as drones, into the national airspace system by September 30, 2015. Existing federal law requires the Administrator of the Federal Aviation Administration to develop and implement operational and certification requirements for the operation of public unmanned aircraft systems in the national airspace system by December 31, 2015.

Existing law provides that a person who comes into any school building or upon any school ground, or adjacent street, sidewalk, or public way, whose presence or acts interfere with or disrupt a school activity, without lawful business, or who remains after having been asked to leave, as specified, is guilty of a misdemeanor. Existing law also makes it a crime to possess a firearm within 1,000 feet of a public or private school providing instruction in kindergarten or grades 1 to 12, inclusive. Existing law also makes it a crime inclusive, or to possess specified knives or blades on the grounds of a public or private school providing instruction in kindergarten or grades 1 to 12, inclusive. those schools.

This bill would would, unless authorized by federal law, make it an infraction to knowingly and intentionally operate an unmanned aircraft system on or above the grounds of of, or less than 350 feet above ground level within the airspace overlaying, a public school providing instruction in kindergarten or grades 1 to 12, inclusive, during school hours and without the written permission of the school principal or higher authority, or his or her designee, or equivalent school authority. The bill would also also, unless authorized by federal law, make it an infraction to knowingly and intentionally use an unmanned aircraft system to capture images of public school grounds providing instruction in kindergarten or grades 1 to 12, inclusive, during school hours and without the written permission of the school principal or higher authority, or his or her designee, or equivalent school authority. The bill would define school hours for its purposes as during any school session, extracurricular activity, or event sponsored by or participated in by the school, and the one-hour periods immediately preceding and following any session, activity, or event. The bill would provide for a warning for a first violation and a fine of no more than $200 for each subsequent violation. The bill would exempt from its provisions any publisher, editor, reporter, or other person connected with or employed by a newspaper, magazine, or other periodical publication, a radio or television station, or by a press association or wire service, unless the principal or the principals designee has requested that the person cease the operation of the unmanned aircraft system on the basis that the operation of the unmanned aircraft system would be disruptive of, or interfere with, classes of the public school program. The bill would also exempt law enforcement from its provisions. By creating new crimes, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law makes it a crime to possess a firearm within 1,000 feet of a public or private school providing instruction in kindergarten or grades 1 to 12, inclusive. Existing law also makes it a crime to possess specified knives or blades on the grounds of a public or private school providing instruction in kindergarten or grades 1 to 12, inclusive.

This bill would make it an infraction to operate an unmanned aircraft system on or above the grounds of a public school providing instruction in kindergarten or grades 1 to 12, inclusive, during school hours and without the written permission of the school principal or higher authority, or his or her designee, or equivalent school authority. The bill would also make it an infraction to use an unmanned aircraft system to capture images of public school grounds providing instruction in kindergarten or grades 1 to 12, inclusive, during school hours and without the written permission of the school principal or higher authority, or his or her designee, or equivalent school authority. The bill would define school hours for its purposes as during any school session, extracurricular activity, or event sponsored by or participated in by the school, and the one-hour periods immediately preceding and following any session, activity, or event. The bill would provide for a warning for a first violation, a fine of no more than $50 for the 2nd violation of its provisions, violation and a fine of no more than $200 for each subsequent violation. The bill would exempt from its provisions any publisher, editor, reporter, or other person connected with or employed by a newspaper, magazine, or other periodical publication, a radio or television station, or by a press association or wire service, unless the principal or the principals designee has requested that the person cease the operation of the unmanned aircraft system on the basis that the operation of the unmanned aircraft system would be disruptive of, or interfere with, classes of the public school program. The bill would also exempt law enforcement from its provisions.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law makes it a crime to possess a firearm within 1,000 feet of a public or private school providing instruction in kindergarten or grades 1 to 12, inclusive. Existing law also makes it a crime to possess specified knives or blades on the grounds of a public or private school providing instruction in kindergarten or grades 1 to 12, inclusive.

This bill would make it an infraction to operate an unmanned aircraft system on or above the grounds of a public school providing instruction in kindergarten or grades 1 to 12, inclusive, during school hours and without the written permission of the school principal or higher authority, or his or her designee, or equivalent school authority. The bill would also make it an infraction to use an unmanned aircraft system to capture images of public school grounds providing instruction in kindergarten or grades 1 to 12, inclusive, during school hours and without the written permission of the school principal or higher authority, or his or her designee, or equivalent school authority. The bill would define school hours for its purposes as during any school session, extracurricular activity, or event sponsored by or participated in by the school, and the one-hour periods immediately preceding and following any session, activity, or event. The bill would provide for a warning for a first violation, a fine of no more than $50 for the first 2nd violation of its provisions, and a fine of no more than $200 for each subsequent violation. The bill would exempt from its provisions any publisher, editor, reporter, or other person connected with or employed by a newspaper, magazine, or other periodical publication, or by a press association or wire service, unless the principal or the principals designee has requested that the person cease the operation of the unmanned aircraft system on the basis that the operation of the unmanned aircraft system would be disruptive of, or interfere with, classes of the public school program. The bill would also exempt law enforcement from its provisions.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law makes it a crime to possess a firearm within 1,000 feet of a public or private school providing instruction in kindergarten or grades 1 to 12, inclusive. Existing law also makes it a crime to possess specified knives or blades on the grounds of a public or private school providing instruction in kindergarten or grades 1 to 12, inclusive.

This bill would make it an infraction to operate an unmanned aircraft system on or above the grounds of a public school providing instruction in kindergarten or grades 1 to 12, inclusive. This inclusive, during school hours and without the written permission of the school principal or higher authority, or his or her designee, or equivalent school authority. The bill would also make it an infraction to use an unmanned aircraft system to capture images of public school grounds providing instruction in kindergarten or grades 1 to 12, inclusive, during school hours and without the written permission of the school principal or higher authority, or his or her designee, or equivalent school authority. The bill would define school hours for its purposes as during any school session, extracurricular activity, or event sponsored by or participated in by the school, and the one-hour periods immediately preceding and following any session, activity, or event. The bill would provide for a fine of no more than $150 $50 for the first violation of its provisions, and a fine of no more than $500 $200 for each subsequent violation.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Existing law makes it a crime to possess a firearm within 1,000 feet of a public or private school providing instruction in kindergarten or grades 1 to 12, inclusive. Existing law also makes it a crime to possess specified knives or blades on the grounds of a public or private school providing instruction in kindergarten or grades 1 to 12, inclusive.

This bill would make it an infraction to operate an unmanned aircraft system on or above the grounds of a public school providing instruction in kindergarten or grades 1 to 12, inclusive. This bill would provide for a fine of no more than $150 for the first violation of its provisions, and a fine of no more than $500 for each subsequent violation.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

 VETO  

Bill No: SB 271

Author: Gaines (R), et al.

Amended: 9/1/15

Vote: 21

SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE: 6-0, 4/14/15

AYES: Hancock, Anderson, Leno, McGuire, Monning, Stone

NO VOTE RECORDED: Liu

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: Senate Rule 28.8

SENATE FLOOR: 37-0, 5/7/15

AYES: Allen, Anderson, Bates, Beall, Berryhill, Block, Cannella, De León, Gaines, Galgiani, Hall, Hancock, Hernandez, Hertzberg, Hill, Hueso, Huff, Jackson, Lara, Leno, Leyva, McGuire, Mendoza, Mitchell, Monning, Moorlach, Morrell, Nguyen, Nielsen, Pan, Pavley, Roth, Runner, Stone, Vidak, Wieckowski, Wolk

NO VOTE RECORDED: Fuller, Liu

SENATE FLOOR: 40-0, 9/4/15

AYES: Allen, Anderson, Bates, Beall, Berryhill, Block, Cannella, De León, Fuller, Gaines, Galgiani, Glazer, Hall, Hancock, Hernandez, Hertzberg, Hill, Hueso, Huff, Jackson, Lara, Leno, Leyva, Liu, McGuire, Mendoza, Mitchell, Monning, Moorlach, Morrell, Nguyen, Nielsen, Pan, Pavley, Roth, Runner, Stone, Vidak, Wieckowski, Wolk

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 80-0, 9/3/15 - See last page for vote

SUBJECT: Unmanned aircraft systems

SOURCE: Author

DIGEST: This bill makes it a criminal infraction to knowingly and intentionally operate an unmanned aircraft system (UAS) at or less than 350 feet above a public school campus or to use a UAS to capture images of a public school campus during school hours without the written permission of the school principal.

ANALYSIS:

Existing federal law, the Aviation Administration Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, requires the Secretary of Transportation to develop a comprehensive plan to safely accelerate the integration of civil unmanned aircraft systems into the national airspace system. The plan is required to provide for safe integration of civil unmanned aircraft systems into national airspace as soon as practicable, not later than September 30, 2015. (112 P.L. 95, 332)

Existing state law:

1. Prohibits wiretapping or eavesdropping on confidential communications. (Penal Code § 630)

2. Makes it a crime for a person, intentionally, and without requisite consent, to eavesdrop on a confidential communication by means of any electronic amplifying or recording device. (Penal Code § 632.)

This bill:

1. Prohibits the knowing and intentional operation of a UAS at or less than 350 feet above the grounds of a public school (K-12 school).

2. Prohibits the unauthorized use of a UAS to capture images of K-12 school grounds during school hours.

3. Provides exceptions to these prohibitions for:

   1. The news media, i.e., newspaper, television, radio, news wire services, periodicals, and their Internet Web sites, including individuals connected to or employed by the news media;

   2. Law enforcement agencies;

   3. UAS users who have written permission from the school principal, the principal’s designee, or a higher authority; and

   4. Entities authorized by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to use UAS, if the UAS is operated in accordance with the terms and conditions of the authorization.

4. Requires the news media to stop using a UAS over a K-12 school's grounds upon the request of a school principal on the basis that the UAS would disrupt class or other school activities.

5. Authorizes the imposition of a warning for the first violation, and a fine of $200 for each subsequent violation.

6. Defines "school hours" to include any school session, extracurricular activities, events sponsored by the school, and one hour before and after any session, activity, or event.

7. Defines "unmanned aircraft" and "unmanned aircraft system" consistent with FAA regulation.

Comments

This bill prohibits the use of drones on school grounds and capturing images of a school during school hours or school activities without written permission of the school. The penalty for a first offense is a warning. The penalty for a second or subsequent offense is an infraction punishable by a fine of not more than $200 plus approximately 300% penalty assessments so the maximum fine would be approximately $800. The prohibition in this bill applies during school hours as defined. Law enforcement and news organizations are exempt from the prohibition.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes Local: Yes

According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, minor nonreimbursable costs to cities and counties for enforcement, offset to some extent by fine revenues.

SUPPORT: (10/27/15)

None received

OPPOSITION: (10/27/15)

California Public Defenders Association

GOVERNOR'S VETO MESSAGE:

I am returning the following nine bills without my signature:

Assembly Bill 144

Assembly Bill 849

Senate Bill 168

Senate Bill 170

Senate Bill 271

Senate Bill 333

Senate Bill 347

Senate Bill 716

Senate Bill 722

Each of these bills creates a new crime - usually by finding a novel way to characterize and criminalize conduct that is already proscribed. This multiplication and particularization of criminal behavior creates increasing complexity without commensurate benefit.

Over the last several decades, California's criminal code has grown to more than 5,000 separate provisions, covering almost every conceivable form of human misbehavior. During the same period, our jail and prison populations have exploded.

Before we keep going down this road, I think we should pause and reflect on how our system of criminal justice could be made more human, more just and more cost-effective.

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 80-0, 9/3/15

AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Travis Allen, Baker, Bigelow, Bloom, Bonilla, Bonta, Brough, Brown, Burke, Calderon, Campos, Chang, Chau, Chávez, Chiu, Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Dababneh, Dahle, Daly, Dodd, Eggman, Frazier, Beth Gaines, Gallagher, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gatto, Gipson, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gray, Grove, Hadley, Harper, Roger Hernández, Holden, Irwin, Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Kim, Lackey, Levine, Linder, Lopez, Low, Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, McCarty, Medina, Melendez, Mullin, Nazarian, Obernolte, O'Donnell, Olsen, Patterson, Perea, Quirk, Rendon, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Santiago, Steinorth, Mark Stone, Thurmond, Ting, Wagner, Waldron, Weber, Wilk, Williams, Wood, Atkins

Prepared by: Mary Kennedy / PUB. S. /

11/4/15 14:01:14

**** END ****

 UNFINISHED BUSINESS  

Bill No: SB 271

Author: Gaines (R), et al.

Amended: 9/1/15

Vote: 21

SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE: 6-0, 4/14/15

AYES: Hancock, Anderson, Leno, McGuire, Monning, Stone

NO VOTE RECORDED: Liu

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: Senate Rule 28.8

SENATE FLOOR: 37-0, 5/7/15

AYES: Allen, Anderson, Bates, Beall, Berryhill, Block, Cannella, De León, Gaines, Galgiani, Hall, Hancock, Hernandez, Hertzberg, Hill, Hueso, Huff, Jackson, Lara, Leno, Leyva, McGuire, Mendoza, Mitchell, Monning, Moorlach, Morrell, Nguyen, Nielsen, Pan, Pavley, Roth, Runner, Stone, Vidak, Wieckowski, Wolk

NO VOTE RECORDED: Fuller, Liu

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 80-0, 9/3/15 - See last page for vote

SUBJECT: Unmanned aircraft systems

SOURCE: Author

DIGEST: This bill makes it a criminal infraction to knowingly and intentionally operate an unmanned aircraft system (UAS) at or less than 350 feet above a public school campus or to use a UAS to capture images of a public school campus during school hours without the written permission of the school principal.

Assembly Amendments:

1. Add a definition of unmanned aircraft.

2. Provide that this section does not apply to any entity for which the Federal Aviation Administration has authorized the use of the unmanned aircraft or unmanned aircraft system if the unmanned aircraft or unmanned aircraft system is operated in accordance with the terms and condition of authorization.

3. Make technical changes.

ANALYSIS:

Existing federal law, the Aviation Administration Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, requires the Secretary of Transportation to develop a comprehensive plan to safely accelerate the integration of civil unmanned aircraft systems into the national airspace system. The plan is required to provide for safe integration of civil unmanned aircraft systems into national airspace as soon as practicable, not later than September 30, 2015. (112 P.L. 95, 332)

Existing state law:

1. Prohibits wiretapping or eavesdropping on confidential communications. (Penal Code § 630)

2. Makes it a crime for a person, intentionally, and without requisite consent, to eavesdrop on a confidential communication by means of any electronic amplifying or recording device. (Penal Code § 632.)

This bill:

1. Prohibits the knowing and intentional operation of a UAS at or less than 350 feet above the grounds of a public school (K-12 school).

2. Prohibits the unauthorized use of a UAS to capture images of K-12 school grounds during school hours.

3. Provides exceptions to these prohibitions for:

   1. The news media, i.e., newspaper, television, radio, news wire services, periodicals, and their Internet Web sites, including individuals connected to or employed by the news media;

   2. Law enforcement agencies;

   3. UAS users who have written permission from the school principal, the principal’s designee, or a higher authority; and

   4. Entities authorized by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to use UAS, if the UAS is operated in accordance with the terms and conditions of the authorization.

4. Requires the news media to stop using a UAS over a K-12 school's grounds upon the request of a school principal on the basis that the UAS would disrupt class or other school activities.

5. Authorizes the imposition of a warning for the first violation, and a fine of $200 for each subsequent violation.

6. Defines "school hours" to include any school session, extracurricular activities, events sponsored by the school, and one hour before and after any session, activity, or event.

7. Defines "unmanned aircraft" and "unmanned aircraft system" consistent with FAA regulation.

Comments

This bill prohibits the use of drones on school grounds and capturing images of a school during school hours or school activities without written permission of the school. The penalty for a first offense is a warning. The penalty for a second or subsequent offense is an infraction punishable by a fine of not more than $200 plus approximately 300% penalty assessments so the maximum fine would be approximately $800. The prohibition in this bill applies during school hours as defined. Law enforcement and news organizations are exempt from the prohibition.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes Local: Yes

According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, minor nonreimbursable costs to cities and counties for enforcement, offset to some extent by fine revenues.

SUPPORT: (Verified 9/3/15)

None received

OPPOSITION: (Verified 9/3/15)

California Public Defenders Association

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 80-0, 9/03/15

AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Travis Allen, Baker, Bigelow, Bloom, Bonilla, Bonta, Brough, Brown, Burke, Calderon, Campos, Chang, Chau, Chávez, Chiu, Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Dababneh, Dahle, Daly, Dodd, Eggman, Frazier, Beth Gaines, Gallagher, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gatto, Gipson, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gray, Grove, Hadley, Harper, Roger Hernández, Holden, Irwin, Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Kim, Lackey, Levine, Linder, Lopez, Low, Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, McCarty, Medina, Melendez, Mullin, Nazarian, Obernolte, O'Donnell, Olsen, Patterson, Perea, Quirk, Rendon, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Santiago, Steinorth, Mark Stone, Thurmond, Ting, Wagner, Waldron, Weber, Wilk, Williams, Wood, Atkins

Prepared by: Mary Kennedy / PUB. S. /

9/3/15 15:37:43

**** END ****

SENATE THIRD READING

STR Bill Id:SB 271

Author:(Gaines)

As Amended Ver:September 1, 2015

Majority vote

SENATE VOTE: 37-0

SUMMARY: Makes it a criminal infraction to knowingly and intentionally operate an unmanned aircraft system (UAS) at or less than 350 feet above a public school campus or to use a UAS to capture images of a public school campus during school hours without the written permission of the school principal. Specifically, this bill:

1. Prohibits the knowing and intentional operation of a UAS at or less than 350 feet above the grounds of a public school (K-12 school).

2. Prohibits the unauthorized use of a UAS to capture images of K-12 school grounds during school hours.

3. Provides exceptions to these prohibitions for:

   1. The news media, i.e., newspaper, television, radio, news wire services, periodicals, and their Internet Web sites, including individuals connected to or employed by the news media;

   2. Law enforcement agencies;

   3. UAS users who have written permission from the school principal, the principal’s designee, or a higher authority; and

   4. Entities authorized by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to use UAS, if the UAS is operated in accordance with the terms and conditions of the authorization.

4. Requires the news media to stop using a UAS over a K-12 school's grounds upon the request of a school principal on the basis that the UAS would disrupt class or other school activities.

5. Authorizes the imposition of a warning for the first violation, and a fine of $200 for each subsequent violation.

6. Defines "school hours" to include any school session, extracurricular activities, events sponsored by the school, and one hour before and after any session, activity, or event.

7. Defines "unmanned aircraft" and "unmanned aircraft system" consistent with FAA regulation.

FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, minor nonreimbursable costs to cities and counties for enforcement, offset to some extent by fine revenues.

COMMENTS: This bill seeks to protect the privacy of public school students and to shield them from potential injury, harassment, stalking, kidnapping or other harms that could stem from the use of UAS to capture students’ images or movements on public school campuses. This bill is author-sponsored.

On February 15, 2015, the FAA released a proposed framework of regulations to allow the use of "small" UAS (under 55 pounds) in national airspace, i.e., above 400 feet. The FAA has stated it may create a less strict regulatory framework for "micro" UAS (under 4.4 pounds). Once the FAA has finished promulgating regulations governing the use of UAS, a future court may find that those regulations preempt certain state laws – such as this one, if passed – but this remains uncertain.

Despite the myriad practical applications for UAS, the need for controls on the use of certain UAS uses is undisputed in light of the profound negative impacts UAS can have on personal privacy and safety. UAS equipped with cameras, microphones, Internet or wireless connections, and remote controls have enormous potential to invade personal space if used, for example, to hover at low heights over fenced backyards, outside the windows of homes, over schools, and in other public and private spaces. Among other things, UAS can be used to capture close up images of faces, body parts, or personal property, and could be used to listen to private conversations. They can also crash as a result of low battery power or operator error, putting individuals at personal risk as well.

Recent amendments clarify that this bill does not apply to UAS operators who have FAA authorization, as long as the UAS is operated in accordance with the FAA authorization.

Analysis Prepared by: Jennie Bretschneider / P. & C.P. / (916) 319-2200 FN: 0001855

SENATE THIRD READING

STR Bill Id:SB 271

Author:(Gaines)

As Amended Ver:July 16, 2015

Majority vote

SENATE VOTE: 37-0

SUMMARY: Makes it a criminal infraction to knowingly and intentionally operate an unmanned aircraft system (UAS) at or less than 350 feet above a public school campus or to use a UAS to capture images of a public school campus during school hours without the written permission of the school principal. Specifically, this bill:

1. Prohibits the knowing and intentional operation of a UAS at or less than 350 feet above the grounds of a public school providing instruction in kindergarten or grades 1 through 12 (K-12 school).

2. Prohibits the unauthorized use of a UAS to capture images of K-12 school grounds during school hours.

3. Provides exceptions to these prohibitions for:

   1. The news media, including newspaper, television, radio, news wire services, and periodical publications engaged in gathering, receiving, or processing information for communication to the public, or individuals connected to or employed by the news media;

   2. Law enforcement agencies; and

   3. UAS users who have written permission from the school principal, the principal's designee, or a higher authority.

4. Requires the news media to stop using a UAS over a K-12 school's grounds upon the request of a school principal on the basis that the UAS would disrupt class or other school activities.

5. Authorizes the imposition of a warning for the first violation, and a fine of $200 for each subsequent violation.

6. Defines "school hours" to include any school session, extracurricular activities, events sponsored by the school, and one hour before and after any session, activity, or event.

7. Defines "unmanned aircraft" and "unmanned aircraft system" consistent with Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulation.

FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, minor nonreimbursable costs to cities and counties for enforcement, offset to some extent by fine revenues.

COMMENTS: This bill seeks to protect the privacy of public school students and to shield them from potential injury, harassment, stalking, kidnapping or other harms that could stem from the use of UAS to capture students’ images or movements on public school campuses. This bill is author-sponsored.

Commercial applications for UAS are growing exponentially. UAS gives the news media economical and environmentally friendly access to aerial views of traffic, storms, and other events when compared to the current use of helicopters and other manned aircraft. UAS is used in the agricultural industry to observe and measure crops while conserving resources and avoiding the use of heavy equipment. And UAS may be the future delivery system for mail order and Internet companies.

On February 15, 2015, the FAA released a proposed framework of regulations to allow the use of "small" UAS (under 55 pounds) in national airspace, i.e., above 400 feet. If enacted, the proposed rules would limit flights to non-recreational, daylight uses and would require the UAS pilot to maintain a visual line of sight with the UAS. The FAA has stated it may create a less strict regulatory framework for "micro" UAS (under 4.4 pounds). Once the FAA has finished promulgating regulations governing the use of UAS, a future court may find that those regulations preempt certain state laws – such as this one, if passed – but this remains uncertain.

Despite the myriad practical applications for UAS, the need for controls on the use of certain UAS uses is undisputed in light of the profound negative impacts UAS can have on personal privacy and safety. UAS equipped with cameras, microphones, Internet or wireless connections, and remote controls have enormous potential to invade personal space if used, for example, to hover at low heights over fenced backyards, outside the windows of homes, over schools, and in other public and private spaces. Among other things, UAS can be used to capture close up images of faces, body parts, or personal property, and could be used to listen to private conversations. They can also crash as a result of low battery power or operator error, putting individuals at personal risk as well.

The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), which protects the privacy of student information held in a student's educational record, does not cover photos or videos of students taken by a UAS hovering above a school campus.

Analysis Prepared by: Jennie Bretschneider / P. & C.P. / (916) 319-2200 FN: 0001531

Date of Hearing: August 19, 2015

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Jimmy Gomez, Chair

SBPCA Bill Id:SB 271

Author:(Gaines) – As Amended Ver:July 16, 2015

Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: Yes Reimbursable: No

SUMMARY:

This bill:

1. Makes it an infraction to knowingly and intentionally operate an unmanned aircraft system (UAS, or drone) less than 350 feet above the grounds of a public K-12 school, or to capture images of the school, during school hours without written permission from a school official. A first violation is subject to a warning and subsequent violations are subject to a fine of up to $200.

2. Stipulates that the above does not apply to:

   1. A publisher, editor, reporter, or other person connected with or employed by a newspaper, magazine, or other periodical publication when gathering information to provide to the public, or by a radio or television station, or by a press association or wire service, unless requested by a school official to cease using the UAS.

2. Law enforcement agencies.

FISCAL EFFECT:

Minor nonreimbursable costs to cities and counties for enforcement, offset to some extent by fine revenues.

COMMENTS:

1. Purpose. This bill seeks to protect the privacy of public school students and to protect students from potential injury, harassment, stalking, kidnapping or other harm that could stem from the use of UAS to capture students’ images or movements on public school campuses. According to the author, “Currently, California has few laws governing drone use and data capture. As drone usage becomes more common, the potential for misuse and abuse of them will expand as well. This bill is intended to stay ahead of the technological curve by providing safeguards for our children while they are at school. By prohibiting drone flights over public schools grades K-12 and prohibiting data capture (video footage or photographs, e.g.) of activity on school grounds, this bill would provide an important layer of privacy to our students at a place that should be a sanctuary.”

2. Related Legislation. AB 56 (Quirk), pending in Senate Appropriations, regulates the use of unmanned aircraft systems by public agencies.
   
   

AB 170 (Gaines), also on today's committee agenda, makes it a misdemeanor to knowingly and intentionally operate an unmanned aircraft system (drone) on or above the grounds of a state prison or jail.

SB 142 (Jackson), pending in the Assembly, makes it a trespass to operate an unmanned aircraft system less than 350 feet above ground over private property without the consent of the owner.

Analysis Prepared by: Chuck Nicol / APPR. / (916) 319-2081

Date of Hearing: July 15, 2015

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION

Patrick O'Donnell, Chair

SBPCA Bill Id:SB 271

Author:(Gaines) – As Amended Ver:June 30, 2015

[Note: This bill was double referred to the Assembly Committee on Privacy and Consumer and was heard by that committee as it relates to issues under its jurisdiction.]

SENATE VOTE: 37-0

SUBJECT: Unmanned aircraft systems

SUMMARY: Makes it an infraction to knowingly and intentionally operate an unmanned aircraft system (UAS) at or less than 350 feet above a public school or to use a UAS to capture images of a public school campus during school hours without the written permission of the school principal or other school official, as specified. Specifically, this bill:

1. Prohibits the knowing and intentional operation of a UAS at, or less than 350 feet above the grounds of a public school providing instruction in kindergarten or grades 1 through 12 (K-12 school).
   
   

2. Prohibits the unauthorized use of a UAS to capture images of K-12 school grounds during school hours.
   
   

3. Provides exceptions to these prohibitions for:
   
   

1. A publisher, editor, reporter, or other person connected with or employed by a newspaper, magazine, or other periodical publication, or by a radio or television station, or by a press association or wire service, or any person who has been so connected or employed (news media);

2. Law enforcement agencies; and
   
   

3. UAS users who have written permission from the school principal, the principal’s designee, or a higher authority.

2. Requires the news media to stop using a UAS over a K-12 school’s grounds upon the request of a school principal or his or her designee on the basis that the UAS would disrupt class or other school activities.

3. Authorizes the imposition of a warning for the first violation, and a fine of $200 for each subsequent violation.

4. Defines “school hours” to include one hour before through one hour after any school session, extracurricular activities, or events sponsored by the school.

5. Defines “unmanned aircraft” to mean an aircraft that is operated without the possibility of direct human intervention from within or on the aircraft.

6. Defines "unmanned aircraft system" to mean an unmanned aircraft and associated elements, including, but not limited to, communication links and the components that control the aircraft that are required for the pilot in command to operate safely and efficiently in the national airspace system.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Requires, under the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, the FAA to integrate UAS into the national airspace system by September 30, 2015, and to develop and implement certification requirements for the operation of UAS in the national airspace system by December 31, 2015. (Public Law Number 112-095)

2. Prohibits, with exceptions, electronic eavesdropping or recording of private communications by telephone, radio telephone, cellular radio telephone, cable or any other device or in any other manner. Violation can result in penalties of up to $10,000 and imprisonment in county jail or state prison for up to one year. (Penal Code (PC) Sections 630-638)

3. Prohibits looking through a hole or opening or otherwise view, by means of any instrumentality, the interior of bedrooms, bathrooms, and various other areas in which an occupant has a reasonable expectation of privacy, with the intent to invade the privacy of one or more persons inside. (PC 647(j)(1))
   
   

4. Defines “physical invasion of privacy” as the knowing entry on the land of another without permission, or otherwise committed a trespass, in order to capture an image, sound recording or other impression in a private, personal, or familial activity and the invasion occurs in a manner that is offensive to a reasonable person. (CC 1708.8)

5. Defines “constructive invasion of privacy” in terms of attempting to capture, in a manner highly offensive to a reasonable person, any type of visual image, sound recording, or other physical impression of another person engaging in a personal or familial activity under circumstances in which the plaintiff had a reasonable expectation of privacy, through the use of a visual or auditory enhancing device, regardless of whether there was a physical trespass, if the image or recording could not have been achieved without a trespass unless the visual or auditory enhancing device was used. (CC 1708.8 (b))

6. Establishes the federal Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), which protects the privacy of student information in educational records.

FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8, negligible state costs.

COMMENTS:

Purpose of this bill. This bill seeks to protect the privacy of public school students and to protect students from potential injury, harassment, stalking, kidnapping or other harms that could stem from the use of UAS to capture students’ images or movements on public school campuses. According to the author, “Currently, California has few laws governing drone use and data capture. As drone usage becomes more common, the potential for misuse and abuse of them will expand as well. This bill is intended to stay ahead of the technological curve by providing safeguards for our children while they are at school. By prohibiting drone flights over public schools grades K-12 and prohibiting data capture (video footage or photographs, e.g.) of activity on school grounds, this bill would provide an important layer of privacy to our students at a place that should be a sanctuary.”

The many uses of UAS. The FAA defines a UAS as an unmanned aircraft system and all of the associated support equipment, control stations, data links, telemetry, and communications and navigation equipment necessary to operate the unmanned aircraft. A UAS is flown either by a pilot via a ground control system or autonomously through use of an on-board computer. UAS are widely available to the public. Retail UAS devices outfitted with cameras now range from roughly $300 to $1,500.

Commercial applications for UAS are growing exponentially. UAS gives the news media economical and environmentally-friendly access to aerial views of traffic, storms, and other events when compared to the current use of helicopters and other manned aircraft. UAS are used in the agricultural industry to observe and measure crops while conserving resources and avoiding the use of heavy equipment. And UAS may be the future delivery system for mail order and Internet companies. In fact, Amazon, the largest Internet-based retailer in the United States, plans to seek FAA approval for “PrimeAir” – a new delivery system that uses small UAS to deliver packages instead of using mail trucks. According to the Amazon.com website, the company has UAS delivery development and testing centers in the United States, the United Kingdom and Israel, but has no immediate plans for roll out.

FAA regulation of UAS. Current FAA rules prohibit UAS use in FAA airspace, but allow commercial users to apply for an exemption from the FAA rules along with an FAA Certificate of Authorization (COA) permitting commercial uses, such as real estate marketing, wedding photography, television, film, mapping, and land surveys. Federal, state and local government agencies, law enforcement, and public colleges and universities can also receive a COA from the FAA authorizing specific uses of UAS for specific time periods.

On February 15, 2015, the FAA released a proposed framework of regulations to allow the use of “small” UAS (under 55 pounds) in national airspace, i.e., above 400 feet. If enacted, the proposed rules would limit flights to non-recreational, daylight uses and would require the UAS pilot to maintain a visual line of sight with the UAS. The FAA has stated it may create a less strict regulatory framework for “micro” UAS (under 4.4 pounds).

Once the FAA has finished promulgating regulations governing the use of UAS, a future court may find that those regulations preempt certain state laws – such as this one, if passed - but this remains uncertain.

The privacy implications of UAS use. Despite the myriad practical applications for UAS, the need for laws limiting certain UAS uses is undisputed in light of the profound effect UAS can have on personal privacy. UAS equipped with cameras, microphones, Internet or wireless connections, and remote controls have enormous potential to invade personal space if used, for example, to hover at low heights over fenced backyards, outside the windows of homes, over schools, and in other public and private spaces. Among other things, UAS can be used to capture close up images of faces, body parts, or personal property, and could be used to listen to private conversations.

This bill requires written permission from the school principal or higher authority before a UAS can be flown above public school grounds when school is in session or during any extracurricular school activity or event. The prohibition starts one hour before and ends one hour after a school session, activity or event. The penalty for a first offense is a simple warning, and the penalty for a second or subsequent offense is an infraction punishable by a fine of $200 plus approximately 300% in penalty assessments, so the maximum fine for subsequent violations would be approximately $800.

FERPA. FERPA protects student information in educational records by placing restrictions on the type of information that can be disclosed to outside individuals, agencies, and organizations without parental consent. Protected information can include photographs, videotapes, and other electronic information, but only if they are contained in an educational record that is maintained by an educational agency. For example, a video taken by a surveillance camera operated by law enforcement is not protected by FERPA. But if that video is later used in a disciplinary action and becomes a part of a student's record, then it would become subject to the requirements of FERPA. Similarly, photos and videos of students that are taken by a camera mounted on a UAS are not protected by FERPA, unless they become part of the educational record maintained by the school.

Exemptions for news media and law enforcement. News organizations and law enforcement agencies are exempt from the bill’s prohibition, but a news organization may be asked to stop using a UAS if the UAS would disrupt classes or other school activities. According to the author’s office, the news media currently have access to school grounds unless the school requests the news media to leave, and this bill adopts the same standard for the news media’s use of UAS.

As written, however, the exemption is overly broad. It exempts any person who is employed or "connected with" a news or media organization even if that person is not engaged in information or news gathering or reporting activity. In addition, it exempts any person who was so employed or connected, but is no longer. Staff recommends the bill be amended to narrow the exemption to (1) individuals in the media who are "engaged in gathering, receiving or processing information for communication with the public" and (2) persons no longer employed by the media, but who were employed at the time they operated the UAS.

Arguments in support. The KlaasKids Foundation states in support that this bill is “a pre-emptive strike at those who would use unmanned aircraft (drone) technology to photograph children (K-12) during those hours that they are present at school. By staying ahead of the technology curve, SB 271 will provide assurances to children, teachers, and parents that students privacy will not be compromised by covert photo images secured via unmanned aircraft.”

Arguments in opposition. The California Public Defenders Association states in opposition that this bill “seem[s] to criminalize the operation of a remote-controlled airplane of the type used by children for recreation, rather than only the operation of more sophisticated drone aircraft as such are commonly understood in the popular mind.”

Related legislation. AB 14 (Waldron) creates the Unmanned Aircraft Systems Task Force, comprised of 10 members. AB 14 failed passage in the Assembly Transportation Committee on a 5-9 vote.

AB 56 (Quirk) regulates the use of unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) by public agencies, including law enforcement. AB 56 passed the Assembly on a 61-12 vote and is will be heard in the Senate Judiciary Committee on July 14, 2015.

AB 856 (Calderon) expands the scope of the cause of action in existing law for physical invasion of privacy by making a person liable for physical invasion of privacy when the person knowingly enters “into the airspace” above the land of another person without permission. AB 856 passed the Assembly on a 78-0 vote and will be heard in the Senate Judiciary Committee on July 14, 2015.

SB 142 (Jackson) extends liability for wrongful occupation of real property and damages to a person who without permission operates a UAS below 350 feet over the real property. SB 142 passed the Senate on a 24-9 vote and is pending in the Assembly Judiciary Committee on July 7, 2015.

SB 170 (Gaines) creates a felony crime for the use of a UAS to deliver contraband into a prison or county jail and creates a misdemeanor crime for the use of UAS over a prison or capture images of a prison. SB 170 passed the Senate on a 40-0 vote and is pending in the Assembly Public Safety Committee on July 7, 2015.

SB 262 (Galgiani) authorizes a law enforcement agency to use a UAS if it complies with the U.S. Constitution and the California Constitution, federal law applicable to the use of UAS by a law enforcement agency, state law applicable to a law enforcement agency’s use of surveillance technology that can be attached to a UAS, and if the local governing board approves the use. SB 262 is sponsored by the California Police Chief’s Association. SB 262 was held in the Senate Judiciary Committee and is a two-year bill.

Prior legislation. AB 1256 (Author:Bloom), Chapter 852, Statutes of 2014, created a cause of action for the capture of a visual image or sound recording of another person with the use of an enhanced visual or audio device liable for "constructive" invasion of privacy, and made it illegal, and subject to civil liability, to attempt to obstruct, intimidate, or otherwise interfere with a person who is attempting to enter or exit a school, medical facility, or lodging, as defined.

AB 2306 (Chau), Chapter 858, Statutes of 2014, expanded a person’s potential liability for constructive invasion of privacy, by removing the limitation that the person use a visual or auditory enhancing device, and instead made the person liable when using any device to engage in the specified unlawful activity.

SB 606 (De León), Chapter 348, Statutes of 2013, increased the penalties for the intentional harassment of a child or ward of another person because of that person's employment and it specified that conduct occurring during the attempt to capture a child's image or voice may constitute harassment if specified conditions occur. SB 15 (Padilla) of 2013 would have imposed a search warrant requirement on law enforcement agency use of a UAS in certain circumstances, would have applied existing civil and criminal law to prohibited activities with devices or instrumentalities affixed to, or contained within a UAS, and would have prohibited equipping a UAS with a weapon, and would have prohibited using a UAS to invade a person's privacy. SB 15 failed passage in the Assembly Public Safety Committee.

AB 524 (Bass), Chapter 499, Statutes of 2009, amended the "invasion of privacy" statute so that a person who sells, transmits, publishes, or broadcasts an image, recording, or physical impression of someone engaged in a personal or familial activity violates the state's "invasion of privacy" statute. Previously, the statute had only applied to the person who wrongfully obtained the image, recording, or physical impression, but not necessarily the entity that sold or published the image, recording, or impression.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

California Police Chiefs Association, Inc.

Klass Kids Foundation

Opposition

California Public Defenders Association

Analysis Prepared by: Rick Pratt / ED. / (916) 319-2087

Date of Hearing: July 7, 2015

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON PRIVACY AND CONSUMER PROTECTION

Mike Gatto, Chair

SBPCA Bill Id:SB 271

Author:(Gaines) – As Amended Ver:June 30, 2015

SENATE VOTE: 37-0

SUBJECT: Unmanned aircraft systems.

SUMMARY: Makes it an infraction to knowingly and intentionally operate an unmanned aircraft system (UAS) at or less than 350 feet above a public school campus or to use a UAS to capture images of a public school campus during school hours without the written permission of the school principal. Specifically, this bill:

1. Prohibits the knowing and intentional operation of a UAS at, or less than 350 feet above the grounds of a public school providing instruction in kindergarten or grades 1 through 12 (K-12 school).
   
   

2. Prohibits the unauthorized use of a UAS to capture images of K-12 school grounds during school hours.
   
   

3. Provides exceptions to these prohibitions for:
   
   

1. The news media, including newspaper, television, radio, and news wire services;

2. Law enforcement agencies; and
   
   

3. UAS users who have written permission from the school principal, the principal’s designee, or a higher authority.

2. Requires the news media to stop using a UAS over a K-12 school’s grounds upon the request of a school principal on the basis that the UAS would disrupt class or other school activities.

3. Authorizes the imposition of a warning for the first violation, and a fine of $200 for each subsequent violation.

4. Defines “school hours” to include any school session, extracurricular activities, events sponsored by the school, and one hour before and after any session, activity, or event.
   
   

5. Defines “unmanned aircraft” and “unmanned aircraft system” consistent with Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulation.
   
   

EXISTING LAW:

1. Requires, under the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, the FAA to integrate UAS into the national airspace system by September 30, 2015, and to develop and implement certification requirements for the operation of UAS in the national airspace system by December 31, 2015. (Public Law Number 112-095)

2. Prohibits, with exceptions, electronic eavesdropping or recording of private communications by telephone, radio telephone, cellular radio telephone, cable or any other device or in any other manner. Violation can result in penalties of up to $10,000 and imprisonment in county jail or state prison for up to one year. (Penal Code (PC) Sections 630-638)

3. Prohibits looking through a hole or opening or otherwise view, by means of any instrumentality, the interior of bedrooms, bathrooms, and various other areas in which an occupant has a reasonable expectation of privacy, with the intent to invade the privacy of one or more persons inside. (PC 647(j)(1))
   
   

4. Defines “physical invasion of privacy” as the knowing entry on the land of another without permission, or otherwise committed a trespass, in order to capture an image, sound recording or other impression in a private, personal, or familial activity and the invasion occurs in a manner that is offensive to a reasonable person. (CC 1708.8)

5. Defines “constructive invasion of privacy” in terms of attempting to capture, in a manner highly offensive to a reasonable person, any type of visual image, sound recording, or other physical impression of another person engaging in a personal or familial activity under circumstances in which the plaintiff had a reasonable expectation of privacy, through the use of a visual or auditory enhancing device, regardless of whether there was a physical trespass, if the image or recording could not have been achieved without a trespass unless the visual or auditory enhancing device was used. (CC 1708.8 (b))

FISCAL EFFECT: The Senate Appropriations Committee found, pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8, that any additional state costs are not significant, and do not and will not require the appropriation of additional state funds, and that the bill will cause no significant reduction in revenues.

COMMENTS:

1. Purpose of this bill. This bill seeks to protect the privacy of public school students and to protect students from potential injury, harassment, stalking, kidnapping or other harms that could stem from the use of UAS to capture students’ images or movements on public school campuses. This bill is author-sponsored.

2. Author’s statement. According to the author, “Currently, California has few laws governing drone use and data capture. As drone usage becomes more common, the potential for misuse and abuse of them will expand as well. This bill is intended to stay ahead of the technological curve by providing safeguard for our children while they are at school. By prohibiting drone flights over public schools grades K-12 and prohibiting data capture (video footage or photographs, e.g.) of activity on school grounds, this bill would provide an important layer of privacy to our students at a place that should be a sanctuary.”
   
   
   

3. The many uses of UAS. The FAA defines a UAS as an unmanned aircraft system and all of the associated support equipment, control stations, data links, telemetry, and communications and navigation equipment necessary to operate the unmanned aircraft. A UAS is flown either by a pilot via a ground control system or autonomously through use of an on-board computer. UAS are widely available to the public. Retail UAS devices outfitted with cameras now range from roughly $300 to $1,500.
   
   
   

Commercial applications for UAS are growing exponentially. UAS gives the news media economical and environmentally-friendly access to aerial views of traffic, storms, and other events when compared to the current use of helicopters and other manned aircraft. UAS is used in the agricultural industry to observe and measure crops while conserving resources and avoiding the use of heavy equipment. And UAS may be the future delivery system for mail order and Internet companies. In fact, Amazon, the largest Internet-based retailer in the United States, plans to seek FAA approval for “PrimeAir” – a new delivery system that uses small UAS to deliver packages instead of using mail trucks. According to the Amazon.com website, the company has UAS delivery development and testing centers in the United States, the United Kingdom and Israel, but has no immediate plans for roll out.

4. FAA regulation of UAS. Current FAA rules prohibit UAS use in FAA airspace unless, but allow commercial users to apply for an exemption from the FAA rules along with an FAA Certificate of Authorization (COA) permitting commercial uses, such as real estate marketing, wedding photography, television, film, mapping, and land surveys. Federal, state and local government agencies, law enforcement, and public colleges and universities can also receive a COA from the FAA authorizing specific uses of UAS for specific time periods.
   
   On February 15, 2015, the FAA released a proposed framework of regulations to allow the use of “small” UAS (under 55 pounds) in national airspace, i.e., above 400 feet. If enacted, the proposed rules would limit flights to non-recreational, daylight uses and would require the UAS pilot to maintain a visual line of sight with the UAS. The FAA has stated it may create a less strict regulatory framework for “micro” UAS (under 4.4 pounds).

Once the FAA has finished promulgating regulations governing the use of UAS, a future court may find that those regulations preempt certain state laws – such as this one, if passed - but this remains uncertain.

5. The privacy implications of UAS use. Despite the myriad practical applications for UAS, the need for laws limiting certain UAS uses is undisputed in light of the profound effect UAS can have on personal privacy. UAS equipped with cameras, microphones, Internet or wireless connections, and remote controls have enormous potential to invade personal space if used, for example, to hover at low heights over fenced backyards, outside the windows of homes, over schools, and in other public and private spaces. Among other things, UAS can be used to capture close up images of faces, body parts, or personal property, and could be used to listen to private conversations.

This bill requires written permission from the school principal or higher authority before a UAS can be flown public school grounds when school is in session or during any extracurricular school activity or event. The prohibition starts one hour before and ends one hour after a school session, activity or event. The penalty for a first offense is a simple warning, and the penalty for a second or subsequent offense is an infraction punishable by a fine of $200 plus approximately 300% in penalty assessments, so the maximum fine for subsequent violations would be approximately $800.

6. Exceptions for news media and law enforcement. News organizations and law enforcement agencies are exempt from the bill’s prohibition, but a news organization may be asked to stop using a UAS if the UAS would disrupt classes or other school activities. According to the author’s office, the news media currently have access to school grounds unless the school requests the news media to leave, and this bill adopts the same standard for the news media’s use of UAS.
   
   
   

7. Arguments in support. The KlaasKids Foundation states in support that this bill is “a pre-emptive strike at those who would use unmanned aircraft (drone) technology to photograph children (K-12) during those hours that they are present at school. By staying ahead of the technology curve, SB 271 will provide assurances to children, teachers, and parents that students privacy will not be compromised by covert photo images secured via unmanned aircraft.”
   
   
   

8. Arguments in opposition. The California Public Defenders Association states in opposition that this bill “seem[s] to criminalize the operation of a remote-controlled airplane of the type used by children for recreation, rather than only the operation of more sophisticated drone aircraft as such are commonly understood in the popular mind.”

9. Related legislation. AB 14 (Waldron) creates the Unmanned Aircraft Systems Task Force, comprised of 10 members. AB 14 failed passage in the Assembly Transportation Committee on a 5-9 vote.

AB 56 (Quirk) regulates the use of unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) by public agencies, including law enforcement. AB 56 passed the Assembly on a 61-12 vote and is will be heard in the Senate Public Safety Committee on July 7, 2015.

AB 856 (Calderon) expands the scope of the cause of action in existing law for physical invasion of privacy by making a person liable for physical invasion of privacy when the person knowingly enters “into the airspace” above the land of another person without permission. AB 856 passed the Assembly on a 78-0 vote and is currently pending in the Senate Judiciary Committee.

SB 142 (Jackson) extends liability for wrongful occupation of real property and damages to a person who without permission operates a UAS below 350 feet over the real property. SB 142 passed the Senate on a 24-9 vote and will be heard in the Assembly Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee on July 7, 2015.

SB 170 (Gaines) creates a felony crime for the use of a UAS to deliver contraband into a prison or county jail and creates a misdemeanor crime for the use of UAS over a prison or capture images of a prison. SB 170 passed the Senate on a 40-0 vote and will be heard in the Assembly Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee on July 7, 2015.

SB 262 (Galgiani) authorizes a law enforcement agency to use a UAS if it complies with the U.S. Constitution and the California Constitution, federal law applicable to the use of UAS by a law enforcement agency, state law applicable to a law enforcement agency’s use of surveillance technology that can be attached to a UAS, and if the local governing board approves the use. SB 262 is sponsored by the California Police Chief’s Association. SB 262 was held in the Senate Judiciary Committee and is a two-year bill.

10. Prior legislation. AB 1256 (Author:Bloom), Chapter 852, Statutes of 2014, created a cause of action for the capture of a visual image or sound recording of another person with the use of an enhanced visual or audio device liable for "constructive" invasion of privacy, and made it illegal, and subject to civil liability, to attempt to obstruct, intimidate, or otherwise interfere with a person who is attempting to enter or exit a school, medical facility, or lodging, as defined.
    
    
    

AB 2306 (Chau), Chapter 858, Statutes of 2014, expanded a person’s potential liability for constructive invasion of privacy, by removing the limitation that the person use a visual or auditory enhancing device, and instead made the person liable when using any device to engage in the specified unlawful activity.

SB 606 (De León), Chapter 348, Statutes of 2013, increased the penalties for the intentional harassment of a child or ward of another person because of that person's employment and it specified that conduct occurring during the attempt to capture a child's image or voice may constitute harassment if specified conditions occur.

SB 15 (Padilla) of 2013 would have imposed a search warrant requirement on law enforcement agency use of a UAS in certain circumstances, would have applied existing civil and criminal law to prohibited activities with devices or instrumentalities affixed to, or contained within a UAS, and would have prohibited equipping a UAS with a weapon, and would have prohibited using a UAS to invade a person's privacy. SB 15 failed passage in the Assembly Public Safety Committee.

AB 524 (Bass), Chapter 499, Statutes of 2009, amended the "invasion of privacy" statute so that a person who sells, transmits, publishes, or broadcasts an image, recording, or physical impression of someone engaged in a personal or familial activity violates the state's "invasion of privacy" statute. Previously, the statute had only applied to the person who wrongfully obtained the image, recording, or physical impression, but not necessarily the entity that sold or published the image, recording, or impression.

11. Double-referral. This bill was double-referred to the Assembly Education Committee, where it will be heard if it passes this Committee.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

California Police Chiefs Association

KlaasKids Foundation

Los Angeles Unified School District

Opposition

California Public Defenders Association

Analysis Prepared by: Jennie Bretschneider / P. & C.P. / (916) 319-2200

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: SB 271

Author: Gaines (R)

Amended: 4/28/15

Vote: 21

SENATE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE: 6-0, 4/14/15

AYES: Hancock, Anderson, Leno, McGuire, Monning, Stone

NO VOTE RECORDED: Liu

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: Senate Rule 28.8

SUBJECT: Unmanned aircraft systems

SOURCE: Author

DIGEST: This bill prohibits the unauthorized use of a drone on a school grounds during school hours or to capture images of the school grounds during school hours.

ANALYSIS:

Existing federal law, the Aviation Administration Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, requires the Secretary of Transportation to develop a comprehensive plan to safely accelerate the integration of civil unmanned aircraft systems into the national airspace system. The plan is required to provide for safe integration of civil unmanned aircraft systems into national airspace as soon as practicable, not later than September 30, 2015. (112 P.L. 95, 332)

Existing state law:

1. Prohibits wiretapping or eavesdropping on confidential communications. (Penal Code § 630)

2. Makes it a crime for a person, intentionally, and without requisite consent, to eavesdrop on a confidential communication by means of any electronic amplifying or recording device. (Penal Code § 632.)

This bill:

1. Provides that unless authorized by federal law, it shall be an infraction to operate an unmanned aircraft system on or above the grounds of a public school providing instruction in kindergarten or grades 1 to 12, inclusive during school hours and without the written permission of the school principal or higher authority, or his or her designee or equivalent authority.

2. Provides that unless authorized by federal law, it shall be an infraction to use an unmanned aircraft system to capture images of public school grounds providing instruction in kindergarten or grades 1 to 12 inclusive, during school hours and without the written permission of the school principal or higher authority, or his or her designee, or equivalent school authority.

3. Provides that upon a first conviction, a warning shall be given.

4. Provides that second or subsequent violation shall be punishable by a fine of not more than $200, plus penalty assessments.

5. Provides that it shall not apply to the operation of an unmanned aircraft system by law enforcement.

6. Defines unmanned aircraft system as an unmanned aircraft and associated elements, including communication links and the components that control the unmanned aircraft that are required for a pilot in command to operate safely and efficiently in the national airspace system.

7. Defines school hours as during any school session, extracurricular activity, or even sponsored by or participated in by the school, and the one-hour periods immediately preceding and following any session, activity or event.

8. States that it shall not apply to a publisher, editor, reporter or other person connected with or employed by a news organization unless a request that the person cease using an unmanned aircraft system at a public school or public school grounds is made by the principal or designee on the basis that the continued presence of the unmanned aircraft system used by the person would be disruptive of, or would interfere with, classes or other activities of the public school program.

Comments

This bill prohibits the use of drones on school grounds and capturing images of a school during school hours or school activities without written permission of the school. The penalty for a first offense is a warning. The penalty for a second or subsequent offense is an infraction punishable by a fine of not more than $200 plus approximately 300% penalty assessments so the maximum fine would be approximately $800.

The prohibition in this bill applies when school is in session or during any extracurricular activity or event sponsored by or participated in by the school. Law enforcement and news organizations are exempt from the prohibition. A news organization may be asked to stop using a drone if the use would be disruptive of, or would interfere with, classes or other activities of the public school program, which is the existing standard for requesting a news organization leave public school grounds.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes Local: Yes

SUPPORT: (Verified 5/5/15)

None received

OPPOSITION: (Verified 5/5/15)

California Public Defenders Association

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: According to the author:

Currently, California has few laws governing drone use and data capture. As drone usage becomes more common, the potential for misuse and abuse of them will expand as well.

This bill is intended to stay ahead of the technological cure by providing safeguard for our children while they are at school. By prohibiting drone flights over public schools grades K-12 and prohibiting data capture (video footage or photographs, e.g.) of activity on school grounds, this bill would provide an important layer of privacy to our students at a place that should be a sanctuary.

In addition, it will help protect students from potential harassment, stalking, kidnap or other potential harm that could be facilitated through drones capturing their location, activities and movement patterns on campus

ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION: The California Public Defenders Association is concerned that the definition of “unmanned systems” is too broad. Specifically they state:

This broad definition seems to lead to the criminalization of more than the author intends. This would seem to criminalize the operation of a remote-controlled airplane of the type used for children for recreation, rather than only the operation of more sophisticated drone aircraft as such are commonly understood in the popular mind. This legislation should include language defining “unmanned aircraft system” in a manner that does not potentially subject innocent recreation to criminal penalty.

Prepared by: Mary Kennedy / PUB. S. /

5/6/15 17:02:33

**** END ****

SENATE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY

Senator Loni Hancock, Chair

2015 - 2016 Regular

Bill No: SB 271 Hearing Date: April 14, 2015

Subject: Unmanned Aircraft Systems

HISTORY

Source: Author

Prior Legislation: SB 15 (Padilla) failed Assembly Public Safety 2014

AB 1327 (Gorell) Vetoed 2014

Support: Unknown

Opposition: The California Public Defenders Association

PURPOSE

The purpose of this bill is to prohibit the unauthorized use of a drone on a school grounds during school hours or to capture images of the school grounds during school hours.

Existing federal law, the Aviation Administration Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 requires the Secretary of Transportation to develop a comprehensive plan to safely accelerate the integration of civil unmanned aircraft systems into the national airspace system. The plan is required to provide for safe integration of civil unmanned aircraft systems into national airspace as soon as practicable, not later than September 30, 2015. (112 P.L. 95, 332)

Existing law prohibits wiretapping or eavesdropping on confidential communications. (Penal Code § 630)

Existing law makes it a crime for a person, intentionally, and without requisite consent, to eavesdrop on a confidential communication by means of any electronic amplifying or recording device. (Penal Code § 632.)

Existing law makes a person liable for “physical invasion of privacy” for knowingly entering onto the land of another person or otherwise committing a trespass in order to physically invade the privacy of another person with the intent to capture any type of visual image, sound recording, or other physical impression of that person engaging in a personal or familial activity, and the physical invasion occurs in a manner that is offensive to a reasonable person. (Civil Code § 1708.8 (a).)

Existing law makes a person liable for “constructive invasion of privacy” for attempting to capture, in a manner highly offensive to a reasonable person, any type of visual image, sound recording, or other physical impression of another person engaging in a personal or familial activity under circumstances in which the plaintiff had a reasonable expectation of privacy, through the use of a visual or auditory enhancing device, regardless of whether there was a physical trespass, if the image or recording could not have been achieved without a trespass unless the visual or auditory enhancing device was used. (Civil Code § 1708.8 (b).)

Existing law provides that a person who commits an invasion of privacy for a commercial purpose shall, in addition to any other damages or remedies provided, be subject to disgorgement to the plaintiff of any proceeds or other consideration obtained as a result of the violation of this section. Existing law defines “commercial purpose” to mean any act done with the expectation of sale, financial gain, or other consideration. (Civil Code §. 1708.8 (d), (k).)

This bill provides that unless authorized by federal law, it shall be an infraction to operate an unmanned aircraft system on or above the grounds of a public school providing instruction in kindergarten or grades 1 to 12, inclusive during school hours and without the written permission of the school principal or higher authority, or his or her designee or equivalent authority..

This bill provides that unless authorized by federal law, it shall be an infraction to use an unmanned aircraft system to capture images of public school grounds providing instruction in kindergarten or grades 1 to 12 inclusive, during school hours and without the written permission of the school principal or higher authority, or his or her designee, or equivalent school authority.

This bill provides that a violation shall be punished by a fine of not more than $50, plus penalty assessments, for a first offense, and a fine of not more than $200, plus penalty assessments for a second offense.

This bill provides that it shall not apply to the operation of an unmanned aircraft system by law enforcement during a public safety emergency.

This bill defines unmanned aircraft system as an unmanned aircraft and associated elements, including communication links and the components that control the unmanned aircraft that are required for a pilot in command to operate safely and efficiently in the national airspace system.

This bill defines school hours as during any school session, extracurricular activity, or even sponsored by or participated in by the school, and the one-hour periods immediately preceding and following any session, activity or event.

RECEIVERSHIP/OVERCROWDING CRISIS AGGRAVATION

For the past eight years, this Committee has scrutinized legislation referred to its jurisdiction for any potential impact on prison overcrowding. Mindful of the United States Supreme Court ruling and federal court orders relating to the state’s ability to provide a constitutional level of health care to its inmate population and the related issue of prison overcrowding, this Committee has applied its “ROCA” policy as a content-neutral, provisional measure necessary to ensure that the Legislature does not erode progress in reducing prison overcrowding.

On February 10, 2014, the federal court ordered California to reduce its in-state adult institution population to 137.5% of design capacity by February 28, 2016, as follows:

• 143% of design bed capacity by June 30, 2014;

• 141.5% of design bed capacity by February 28, 2015; and,

• 137.5% of design bed capacity by February 28, 2016.

In February of this year the administration reported that as “of February 11, 2015, 112,993 inmates were housed in the State’s 34 adult institutions, which amounts to 136.6% of design bed capacity, and 8,828 inmates were housed in out-of-state facilities. This current population is now below the court-ordered reduction to 137.5% of design bed capacity.”( Defendants’ February 2015 Status Report In Response To February 10, 2014 Order, 2:90-cv-00520 KJM DAD PC, 3-Judge Court, Coleman v. Brown, Plata v. Brown (fn. omitted).

While significant gains have been made in reducing the prison population, the state now must stabilize these advances and demonstrate to the federal court that California has in place the “durable solution” to prison overcrowding “consistently demanded” by the court. (Opinion Re: Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part Defendants’ Request For Extension of December 31, 2013 Deadline, NO. 2:90-cv-0520 LKK DAD (PC), 3-Judge Court, Coleman v. Brown, Plata v. Brown (2-10-14). The Committee’s consideration of bills that may impact the prison population therefore will be informed by the following questions:

• Whether a proposal erodes a measure which has contributed to reducing the prison population;

• Whether a proposal addresses a major area of public safety or criminal activity for which there is no other reasonable, appropriate remedy;

• Whether a proposal addresses a crime which is directly dangerous to the physical safety of others for which there is no other reasonably appropriate sanction;

• Whether a proposal corrects a constitutional problem or legislative drafting error; and

• Whether a proposal proposes penalties which are proportionate, and cannot be achieved through any other reasonably appropriate remedy.

COMMENTS

1. Need for This Bill

According to the author:

Currently, California has few laws governing drone use and data capture. As drone usage becomes more common, the potential for misuse and abuse of them will expand as well.

This bill is intended to stay ahead of the technological cure by providing safeguard for our children while they are at school. By prohibiting drone flights over public schools grades K-12 and prohibiting data capture (video footage or photographs, e.g.) of activity on school grounds, this bill would provide an important layer of privacy to our students at a place that should be a sanctuary.

In addition, it will help protect students from potential harassment, stalking, kidnap or other potential harm that could be facilitated through drones capturing their location, activities and movement patterns on campus.

2. Unmanned Aircraft Systems

This bill would use the term “unmanned aircraft systems,” as defined, to reference what are commonly known as drones. That term, also used by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), would be defined to include the unmanned aircraft itself (the drone) and the associated elements (which include the components that control the aircraft). Regarding the types of aircraft that may be considered unmanned aircraft systems, the FAA’s fact sheet notes:

Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) come in a variety of shapes and sizes and serve diverse purposes. They may have a wingspan as large as a Boeing 737 or smaller than a radio-controlled model airplane. Regardless of size, the responsibility to fly safely applies equally to manned and unmanned aircraft operations.

Because they are inherently different from manned aircraft, introducing UAS into the nation’s airspace is challenging for both the FAA and aviation community. UAS must be integrated into a National Airspace System (NAS) that is evolving from ground-based navigation aids to a GPS-based system in NextGen. Safe integration of UAS involves gaining a better understanding of operational issues, such as training requirements, operational specifications and technology considerations.

Although not always thought of when the word “drone” is used, hobby-size airplanes and helicopters that are equipped with digital cameras are becoming more and more affordable for the average consumer. Those hobby aircraft may be used for pure novelty, surveying one’s yard, or even checking to see the condition of a roof. With respect to the treatment of model aircraft as an unmanned aircraft system, the FAA has issued the following clarification:

The current FAA policy for UAS operations is that no person may operate a UAS in the National Airspace System without specific authority. For UAS operating as public aircraft the authority is the [Certificate of Waiver or Authorization], for UAS operating as civil aircraft the authority is special airworthiness certificates, and for model aircraft the authority is AC 91-57 [(the model aircraft operating standards)].

The FAA recognizes that people and companies other than modelers might be flying UAS with the mistaken understanding that they are legally operating under the authority of AC 91-57. AC 91-57 only applies to modelers, and thus specifically excludes its use by persons or companies for business purposes.

3. No Drones on School Grounds

This bill would prohibit the use of drones on school grounds and capturing images of a school during school hours or school activities without written permission of the school. The penalty is an infraction punishable by a fine of $50 plus approximately 300% penalty assessments so approximately a $200 fine. For a second or subsequent offense the penalty is $200 plus approximately 300% penalty assessments so approximately an $800 fine.

The prohibition applies when school is in session or during any extracurricular activity or event sponsored by or participated in by the school.

4. Exception for Law Enforcement During an Emergency

This bill contains and explicit exemption for the use of a drone by law enforcement during a law enforcement emergency.

5. Exception for the News Media

The author intends to offer an amendment to make exception to the prohibition for the news media. The intent of the amendment is to allow the media the same access they currently have on school grounds. They can use a drone but have to leave if asked.

6. Notice

Should the bill require notice on the school grounds that drones are prohibited or require a person be asked to leave before a ticket is issued or have a first violation be a warning? Will a neighbor of the school who goes to one field of the school to fly a drone while a soccer game is going on on another field necessarily know he or she is violating the law?

7. Opposition

The California Public Defenders Association is concerned that the definition of “unmanned systems” is too broad. Specifically they state:

This broad definition seems to lead to the criminalization of more than the author intends. This would seem to criminalize the operation of a remote-controlled airplane of the type used for children for recreation, rather than only the operation of more sophisticated drone aircraft as such are commonly understood in the popular mind. This legislation should include language defining “unmanned aircraft system” in a manner that does not potentially subject innocent recreation to criminal penalty.

-- END –