Lisle committee backs police drone program; chief outlines limits on facial recognition and planned funding

Police Chief Rodriguez told the Village of Lisle Committee of the Whole on July 21 that the police department has used small unmanned aircraft systems (drones) on calls nearly weekly since May and wants a formal village program funded with criminal forfeiture funds, estimated at under $29,000. Rodriguez said the department has five trained pilots, can deploy a drone within about eight minutes and routinely uses thermal sensors for missing-person searches, crowd oversight at events and evidence photography. He told the board the department’s proposed policy—attached to the agenda—prohibits use for First Amendment-protected protests and does not load facial-recognition software onto the platforms. The program’s nut graf: If approved, the purchase and local ownership would reduce response time for missing-person calls and event security while raising questions about local policy on storage, operator access and evidentiary recording. Rodriguez said the drones were used for a July 3 pre-security sweep of a fireworks event and to provide rooftop overwatch during the village parade; in one recent armed, barricaded-subject incident in a neighboring jurisdiction, he said a borrowed drone kept officers from entering a structure. “These platforms have consistently demonstrated their value in enhancing officer safety, improving public event oversight, improving situational awareness, and reducing emergency response times,” Rodriguez said. He described equipment needs that include two outdoor drones and a small indoor platform for entry situations, and estimated the program cost at less than $29,000 to be paid from criminal forfeiture funds discussed previously by the board. Rodriguez said the drones can record photos and short video “solely for evidentiary purposes” when used in a criminal or crash scene and that, with the models under consideration, the technology can identify a human as an object but will not perform biometric identification against a database. Trustees broadly supported moving the proposal to a future board meeting for formal approval. Trustee Olson said she was “100% in support,” noting concern about delays when the village calls for outside assets. Trustee Buscnik asked that village-specific policies make clear who is authorized to store and secure the equipment and that noncertified personnel be barred from handling it. Trustee Salah also voiced support, emphasizing missing-person uses as a public-safety tool. Board members and the chief differentiated three types of activity: (1) routine use at preplanned public events (allowed under Illinois law per the chief), (2) emergency deployments for missing persons or crashes (evidentiary recording), and (3) any use tied to First Amendment-protected activity, which the chief said Illinois law restricts. The chief said the department has attached a draft policy to the agenda and will bring the item back for a formal vote. No formal motion to purchase equipment was made at the meeting; trustees expressed consensus that staff should place the drone program on a future board agenda for formal consideration and approval. Ending: The board’s next step is procedural: staff will prepare the formal ordinance/purchase request, incorporate local storage and operator rules requested by trustees, and place the item on a future meeting agenda for a vote.