Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Wildfire Mitigation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council hears demonstration of multispectral fire-risk mapping; residents raise privacy and policy questions
Summary
A Fire Marshal and a private firm demonstrated drone and low-orbit multispectral mapping intended to prioritize inspections and defensible-space work. Officials said outputs are blurred, nonphotorealistic risk 'blobs' overlaid on parcel maps; residents and council members pressed for privacy safeguards, notice procedures, and a written policy before any regular flights.
Fire Marshal Ryan Jorgensson introduced Alex Mulman of Firecore AI at the June 9 La Habra Heights City Council meeting to demonstrate multispectral and lidar-based mapping intended to identify vegetation health and prioritize fire-risk inspections.
Mulman described a ‘physical AI’ trained on multspectral and lidar data that produces color-coded risk indicators (red, green, blue) representing relative vegetation health and combustibility rather than traditional high-resolution photographs. He said the technology reads chlorophyll and other vegetation indices, and is designed to overlay those indicators on county parcel maps so inspectors can locate hazardous fuel loads and target limited inspection resources.
The chief and Mulman said early test flights in the area had produced imagery at approximately 6–8 cm per pixel and that a planned low-orbit satellite would further increase coverage in months. They described privacy protections built into the system: outputs, they said, are intentionally nonphotorealistic and include automatic blurring of personally identifying features; the chief added the city attorney had reviewed curtilage concerns and that the proposed product would not reveal faces or private activities.
During extended public and council questioning, residents raised several issues: whether the system would comply with state law on drone recording (AB 856), whether staff would have articulable suspicion before recording private property, whether the vendor would indemnify the city against privacy suits (one attendee cited a Sonoma County lawsuit), the altitude and notice for flights, and whether the city should phase in enforcement rather than immediately cite long-standing conditions. Mulman and the chief said they planned to present sample imagery to the council at the next meeting and work with the city attorney and community to craft notice and usage policies.
Council agreed to return the item next month with sample imagery and directed staff to consult the city attorney about privacy and procedural safeguards before any operational program begins. No authorization to begin routine flights or a code-enforcement drone program was adopted at this meeting.
