Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Hb 3426 Drones topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Lawmakers hear bill to criminalize drone interference with firefighting, search-and-rescue; sponsors weigh penalty increase

2499054 · March 4, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

A House Judiciary Committee public hearing considered HB 3426, a bill to expand criminal penalties for drone interference to include firefighting and search-and-rescue operations.

A public hearing on Tuesday considered House Bill 3426, which would expand criminal penalties for interference by unmanned aircraft systems to cover firefighting and search-and-rescue operations. Sponsor Court Boyce told the House Judiciary Committee that the proposed change is intended to protect first responders and preserve public-safety operations.

Court Boyce, the bill sponsor, said HB 3426 would add search-and-rescue efforts and “all firefighting efforts” to the list of public safety activities for which interference by an unmanned aircraft system can carry criminal penalties. He said he has requested a legislative-counsel amendment that would increase the penalty for recklessly causing interference from a class A violation to a class B misdemeanor; Boyce described a class B misdemeanor as carrying a $2,500 fine and jail time (the sponsor’s description of jail time was not consistent with Oregon statutory penalties; see clarification below).

Committee members pressed sponsors on drafting details. Representative Tran and others asked whether “search and rescue” is defined in statute and whether the bill intends to cover both government-led and private search-and-rescue volunteers; Boyce said the intent was broad and to include anyone “focused on taking care of the public and getting to an emergency scene.” Kenji Sugihara, director of the Oregon Department of Aviation, attended to answer technical questions and noted enforcement challenges, particularly the need to detect and locate the drone operator in order to enforce penalties.

Representative Manning and other members cautioned about the fiscal implications of elevating a violation to a misdemeanor, noting potential court, prosecution and public defense costs and suggesting the committee consider whether the change should remain a violation rather than a misdemeanor. The committee discussed the need for public education to deter unintended interference, and the practical challenge of detection and attribution when enforcing drone rules.

The hearing record shows no committee action; the public hearing was closed after questions and discussion.

Statutory accuracy note: during testimony the sponsor described the class B misdemeanor penalty as “$2,500 and up to 30 days in jail.” Committee members corrected that characterization on the record: under Oregon law a class B misdemeanor can be punishable by up to six months in jail; the sponsor’s jail‑time description was incorrect and has been clarified in this report.

No vote was taken at the hearing.