Paramount reviews six‑month drone pilot and asks staff for more data
Loading...
Summary
City staff reported a six‑month review of a civilian drone pilot used to monitor street racing; the review found limited added value in Paramount, cited weather and operational limits, and estimated a higher annual cost if continued. Council asked for more data and possible summer testing.
On Feb. 24, 2026, the Paramount City Council received a six‑month review of a civilian drone pilot program used to monitor street racing and intersection takeovers. Assistant Public Safety Director Eric Wasek told the council the pilot showed some value but had operational limits and a high projected cost.
Wasek said the city contracted drone overwatch services to monitor hotspot intersections under a $109,000 pilot agreement. The contractor provided about 77 operational days, more than 700 flights and roughly 210 flight hours between August and Jan. 31, he said. "Basically we were paying $109,000 for an extra set of eyes," Wasek said. He reported the drones captured 12 takeover‑related calls during the pilot — seven were redundant (other informants or deputies also reported the activity) and five were unique to the drone, while the drone missed seven calls documented by LASD during its operational periods.
Wasek highlighted weather and equipment limitations as major constraints: 76% of lost operational time was due to inclement weather (heavy rain, cloud cover or fog), and the pilot drones required battery swaps and had limited fields of view. He also noted the civilian contractors could not be integrated into LASD enforcement responses; the drones could only observe and report.
On the fiscal side, Wasek said the city spent about $82,000 of the $109,000 allocation because of days the drones could not fly. He gave a projected full‑year cost of about $218,000 and estimated roughly 10 unique capture events per year under that model, which he summarized as nearly $22,000 per unique incident. "So it's — we'll always take direction from council, but that's what the cost would be," he said.
Council members who questioned Wasek raised a mix of operational and cost concerns and suggested alternatives or further analysis. Mayor Lemons said she was "not ready to say let's do away with it yet" and asked staff to return with additional data, including the number and source of community calls, whether a summer deployment would perform differently, and cost comparisons with enhanced private security patrols. Several council members suggested the program may offer more value in jurisdictions with lower resident reporting or longer law‑enforcement response times.
The council did not vote to sign a new contract. Instead, members asked staff to produce more data and pricing options for consideration during the upcoming budget process and to explore a summer pilot or other adjustments that could improve coverage and cost effectiveness. Staff noted budget preparations for fiscal year 2026–27 will be presented in May, and the council can consider CIP/budget implications there.
What happens next: staff will return with requested follow‑up information and cost comparisons; the council left the pilot on the table for additional review rather than approving a full‑year roll‑out.
