Eureka Council OKs Police Drone Research

A member of the Humboldt Anti-War Committee shouts “Free Maduro” during the Jan. 6 public comment period. [Screenshot from the Eureka City Council Zoom meeting]

The Eureka Council recognizes there’s controversy over police use of drones but has authorized research that could lead to approving it.

The authorization was given following a mostly anti-drone public comment period at the Jan. 6 council meeting.

Unmanned aerial systems – drones – are categorized as military equipment and can’t be acquired without council approval.

But the Eureka Police Department (EPD) has been using drones provided by the county Sheriff’s Office, which is allowable as long as the use is reported to the council and the public.

But borrowing drones is “not always the most efficient way to do things,” said Eureka Police Chief Brian Stephens, especially in circumstances where “time is of the essence.”

Eureka Police Chief Brian Stephens speaking to the Eureka City Council. [Screen shot of Zoom video]

The ask before council was only to research the administrative structure, equipment and cost related to developing the city’s own drone program.

Stephens described drones as “a very valuable public safety tool” allowing “real-time situational awareness” and “de-escalation during critical incidents.”

He said drones allow policing to progress and “when we fail to invest in technology, we’re not just limiting innovation, we’re limiting safety.”

Asked how drones have been deployed, Stephens gave several recent examples, including a “barricaded suspect” situation, locating and communicating with a suicidal woman and searching for a missing child.

The child was found by a resident but Stephens said use of drones allowed for an expansive search that would have otherwise been very labor-intensive.

But during a lengthy public comment period, many speakers said a drone program could be expanded and become intrusive.

“Once a surveillance system like this is introduced, meaningful limits are difficult to enforce and the program can quickly bloat and run off into mass surveillance of public events,” said one speaker.

“I’d like to know how the drones would actually be used day to day and not just in the outliers,” said another. “Because the answer is pretty obvious to anyone with eyes, the answer is it’s going to be used for over-policing.”

Others said the concept of efficiency is “used as a smokescreen to implement dehumanization,” that drones are “incredibly scary” rather than de-escalating, and use of drones to monitor protests is a concern.

But a few supported a drone program, including a woman who identified herself as “an adult on the autism spectrum” and said while she doesn’t like the idea of being approached by a drone, “I would prefer it over being approached by an armed officer.”

Councilmember Leslie Castellano said use of Sheriff’s Office drones – which is done under that office’s policies — creates “structural tensions” that can be resolved by giving the city ultimate control.

“So in terms of the citizens who said we may open a Pandora’s box, in my mind the Pandora’s box has already been opened but there is no direct line of oversight or accountability into that Pandora’s box,” she continued.

She said she “applauds” Stephens’ commitment to public disclosure and along with other councilmembers noted the EPD’s collaboration with the county’s only police oversight entity, the Community Oversight on Police Practices board.

Councilmember Kati Moulton shares concern expressed during public comment about how a future version of the council may modify a drone program but “I would have to see no possibility for good to say they can’t even come back with information and not only do I see the possibility for good in my imagination, I see it in front of me.”

Though Councilmember Mario Fernandez has “a degree of ambivalence towards this, given the misuse or potential misuse and abuse versus the perks,” he said a council-approved program would open “accountability for our police department.”

Councilmember Scott Bauer said although there’s “a lot of mistrust of law enforcement” Eureka police officers “are actually great human beings.”

But he also called for limits on police drone use, saying, “I don’t want to see a drone flying over Friday Night Market.”

Approval of the research authorization was unanimous and once the research is done, a proposal for a drone program will come back to council for consideration.

Also at the meeting, many of those who spoke against use of drones also supported a resolution opposing U.S. actions in and related to Venezuela during a general public comment period.

Members of the Humboldt Anti-War Committee vouched for their version of the resolution over the council’s, which calls for congressional approval of any further military actions.

“Our resolution was a good one – your resolution, it included the fact that it would be okay if Congress declared war on Venezuela. That’s not what we’re talking about. That’s immoral. And that means you are immoral,” said one of the committee’s members.

To underscore the implications of the most recent U.S. actions, she raised her clenched fists and shouted, “Free Venezuela, Free Maduro” and added, “Free Gaza!”

As someone in the front row held a sign saying “Free Maduro,” several other speakers demanded that council speak out against “atrocities that are being done in our name and with our tax dollars” and “pass our resolution as quickly as possible because the longer we wait, the worse it gets.”

The resolution was to be taken up at a meeting last month but it was canceled due to lack of a quorum.

But Mayor Kim Bergel said the resolution will be on the agenda of the next meeting.