The Observation Deck

Just like those cameras that aren’t really cameras but Mike Summers proudly watches traffic and residents from his desktop monitor from those “non-cameras,” I’m sure these drones won’t be used for City Hall snooping either.



Proudly from "Big Brother:"

Lakewood Buys Drone to Survey Erosion Along the Cliffs

Thursday, December 26, 2013

In an effort to monitor erosion along the lakeside cliffs, the city of Lakewood will launch its first video surveillance drone this spring.

The Phantom, manufactured by DJI, came with a price tag of approximately $1,200.

Public works director Joe Beno said that using the drone will save money – mostly from cutting labor hours associated with workers repelling down the cliffs and eliminating the need for boat rental.

“I was surprised that the drone was that inexpensive,” Beno said.

The city is required by the EPA to survey and evaluate erosion ever year.

The battery-powered drone – weighing in at only a few pounds – uses GPS technology to find problem areas. With a mounted camera, all of the heavy lifting can be done remotely from the engineering department at city hall.

The drone will even fly back on its own when the battery is low.

The first flight is scheduled for this spring.

http://www.onelakewood.com/News.aspx?NewsID=344

And Big Brother proudly tweets/posts:

Yes, we love technology. #1LKWD -cbm

Matt

I am just shocked!

Not by the drones or what they will actually do with it, but they did something for residents. Granted
the wealthiest residents in the city, and the ones that are close friends with the mayor, and others at
city hall, but I think this might be the first time since the basketball court, the city actually did something
for the residents. At least 50 or so.

Baby steps.

I am also shocked they paid $1,200 for the same unit on sale at Verizon for $299 including a
Go Pro valued at $250, but I am sure they put the purchase out to bid, and posted, like they do ALL positions.

So Let me see, Downtown, gets $400,000 in parking meters, $150,000 paid for by residents, maybe
even more. And 50 or so residents get their cliff checked, which I am sure, could never be checked,
by the 5 boats they own or have access to,

Well it's Christmas and Boys love their toys.

It also spends city dollars to compete against a private Lakewood business, that already does this,
for about $25 a property, after all it is private property that is being looked at or saved.

Also I just found out the Army Corp of Engineers, does this annually at no charge to the city, or
whenever they are requested.

FWIW

Are citizens allowed to capture the city owned drone? And if so what is the reward for it's safe return?

Jim DeVito wrote:Are citizens allowed to capture the city owned drone? And if so what is the reward for it's safe return?

Interesting,

I am sure every second of capture and flight is available through public records. After all
we are paying for it, just like everything else at City Hall we have access to it.

I would think it would be a huge violation to take it up, fly it, take pictures, of anything,
capture or look at the footage, and just throw it away. It would be just like police
dashboard cameras, filed for 3 years, available to public within 24 hours or less.

We should also be allowed to jump onto the signal, and download direct.

What the state of Texas has found out and made legal...

Pursuant to the Texas Public Information Act , I hereby request the following records:

All documents created from January 2005 to the date this request is processed related to the agency's use of aerial drones, remotely piloted vehicles (RPVs), remotely piloted aircraft (RPAs), unmanned aerials (UAs), unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), and/or unmanned aerial systems (UASs)(hereinafter “drones”).

Please search specifically for the below document categories, and respond to each of the categories and items:

1) Acquisition documents:

i) requests for proposals (RFPs), proposals/quotes submitted by vendors, contracts, leases, budget requests, project/equipment budgets, cost allocations or reimbursements for the purchase of drone equipment;

ii) Grant applications and award letters for drone equipment purchases;

iii) Insurance contracts for all drone equipment;

iv) Communications (including electronic communications) between the agency head or agency quartermaster (or individual responsible for equipment purchases and maintenance) and drone vendors, manufacturers or retailers;

v) Communications (including electronic communications) between the agency head and agency quartermaster (or individual responsible for equipment purchases and maintenance) regarding acquisition, lease or use of drone equipment;

vi) Communications (including electronic communications) between the agency head and the governor, mayor and city/town manager regarding the acquisition of drones;

vii) Applications (including all components and support documentation) for Certificates of Waiver/Authorization (COA) from the Federal Aviation Administration, as well as COA grant notifications and final agreement;

viii) Contracts for services related to drones, such as data storage, data analysis, image storage, image analysis, video storage, video analysis, operation, maintenance;

2) Equipment logs:

i) Inventories/logs/lists/databases of all drones owned, leased or operated by or for the agency;

ii) Maintenance logs for all drones owned, leased or otherwise operated by or for the agency;

3) Policy documents:

i) Policies, guidelines, protocols, manuals and/or instructions on the use/operation of drones and usage of data, images and video obtained from drone flights;

ii) Communications from the agency head, quartermaster (or individual responsible for overseeing equipment purchases and maintenance) on approved uses for drones;

iii) Memorandums of understanding (MOUs), memorandums of agreement (MOAs) or any other agreements or contracts with other government agencies, private corporations, organizations or individuals to share drone equipment, data, images or video or to operate drones on behalf of the agency;

4) Training documents:

i) Curriculum used to train drone operators and observers;

ii) Training log for all drone operators and observers;

iii) Certifications of training completion for all drone operators and observers;

iv) Contracts, purchase orders, budget requests or reimbursement orders for training sessions for all drone operators and observers;

5) Usage documents:

i) Flight logs for all drone flights, including training flights;

ii) Flight logs transmitted to the Federal Aviation Administration pursuant to Certificate of Waiver/Authorization (COA) requirements;

iii) Reprimands relating to drones, including misuse of equipment and failure to properly maintain equipment.

FWIW

.

Oh my goodness, can't wait for the first 'flyaway'

I spy with my little eye ...





For those of you who believe that these drones are simply for "monitoring sewer runoff into Lake Erie," recall that the same folks at City Hall told us that those cameras throughout the 'Wood really aren't cameras.



Oh, and the guy playing with City Hall's new toy is in charge of more than just sewage ... http://www.onelakewood.com/PublicWorks/ ...

I'm also a drone owner (For trees. Don't worry), and I've priced the Phantom at about $800, with a GoPro camera coming in at around $400, but they have a unit, the Vision, that includes a camera that comes in at $1200. The Verizon uav is a very light unit, and it would probably have issues with updrafts. The Phantom unit is heavier and would likely be more stable in flight.

Now, about those swimmers...

Some of our legal type experts on the Deck might want to toss around the implications
of flying robot data collectors doing more than looking into windows, Peeping Tom-Tom,
if you will. I'm just baffled by all of it.

The personification of corporations and their contractual rights to obtain billing data as
they see fit, may soon elevate the drone to level of " INVITEE " regarding access to a
structure.

Current drive by readings of RF meters or actual humans who touch a building at the external
data head could so easily be replaced by lovable flying devices.

As an "invitee," could we soon owe a different standard of care to the scheduled flybys
of drones than to Aunt Martha, who drops in when she feels like it ?

" Drones are people, too, my friend. "

How long until they satisfy the slightly higher and murky standard ?