OPA surveillance report: drones up, two body-worn camera lapses reported, license-plate-reader complaint closed
Loading...
Summary
The FY25 surveillance report describes Autel drone use by fire and GRPD unmanned aerial deployments (483 flights), two instances where body-worn cameras failed policy, an administratively closed complaint about license-plate-reader searches, and budget lines including Axon spending for body cameras.
Mister Davis presented the Office's FY25 surveillance report to the Public Safety Committee on Feb. 24, describing the scope and definitions in administrative policy 15-03 and summarizing department-level surveillance use.
The report explained the policy distinction between surveillance equipment and non-surveillance uses, and noted some previously grandfathered technologies remain outside reporting requirements. The Grand Rapids Fire Department used Autel drones for 126 flights (a decrease of 51 from the prior year), primarily for training; 49 flights were non-training uses including recognizance, public relations, water rescue and structure-fire support. Fire department non-training deployments were concentrated in Ward 3. The Fire Department reported $7,581.85 in operating and maintenance costs for Autel drones during the reporting period.
GRPD reported 483 drone flights in FY25 (a 26% increase from FY24), with overwatch and locating persons as the most common uses. Drones logged 130.95 hours across wards; overwatch accounted for about 68% of drone hours. The report said 158 deployments were subject to warrants (up from 148 in FY24). GRPD reported no complaints of drone misuse and said no data was shared externally in the reporting period.
On body-worn cameras, the report recorded two instances in which policy was not followed: one camera was activated late (by 1 minute, 26 seconds) and another failed to turn on because it was not charged during a search-warrant execution. OPA received one complaint alleging misuse of a license-plate-reader to search for a deportation warrant in violation of GRPD Policy 7-12; the city manager directed an expedited review and the city attorney and chief concluded no policy violation occurred, so IAU administratively closed the complaint without a formal complaint-disposition report.
Budget figures appear in the report: the Office of Public Accountability paid Axon $1,619,305.53 for GRPD body-worn cameras in fiscal year 2025; GRPD spent $26,699.17 of departmental funds to operate, maintain and deploy drone technology (including $17,600 for drone software).
Mister DeRite (introduced in the meeting as OPA investigation manager) explained the new "public relations" use category was applied when the Fire Department used drones to showcase a new fire station. He and others said accountability for body-worn camera policy failures is processed through GRPD's Internal Affairs Division with progressive discipline (coaching, written counseling, escalation as needed). Committee members asked whether drones saved money; presenters emphasized time savings on scene reconstruction and improved quality, which indirectly reduce costs but said a comprehensive dollarized snapshot was not provided.
The report also flagged artificial intelligence and facial-recognition tools as future policy considerations, noting both benefits and potential disparities that require careful review.
Committee members asked for further public education about license-plate-reader capabilities and community safeguards; officials agreed the report exceeded minimum reporting by including grandfathered readers because of community concern.
