Committee reviews proposed 75-day 'drones-as-first-responders' pilot for Fourth Precinct, voices privacy and security concerns

On May 13, 2026, the Public Health, Safety, and Equity Committee heard a detailed proposal to test "Drones as First Responders" in the Fourth Precinct.

Andy Scootman, chief of staff for the Office of Community Safety, introduced the concept and said the goal is faster situational awareness so first responders can make better-informed decisions. "This technology is not intended to replace human interaction," Scootman said; instead, he said, drones could arrive before officers or firefighters to provide live video to dispatch and crews en route.

Commander Thomas Campbell of the Minneapolis Police Department, who oversees the department's drone program, told the committee MPD has operated drones since 2022 and proposed a free 75-day trial with the vendor Skydio. He said the pilot would place two drone docks atop Fire Station 14 to serve the Fourth Precinct and that the SkyDio X10 model can operate in rain or snow, sustain roughly 45 minutes of flight per sortie and arrive on many Priority 0 and 1 calls in under two minutes. "A DFR pilot project would be a free 75-day trial period conducted in the Fourth Precinct," Campbell said.

Supporters argued the technology could clear low-level calls without dispatching officers, speed responses to missing-person and river-rescue calls, and reduce overtime by freeing crews for higher-priority work. The 9-1-1 center director said drones can provide location fixes and aerial views faster than calling aviation partners and that thermal imaging can identify hot spots during fires.

Council members and staff emphasized safeguards and legal limits. City and department presenters repeatedly cited Minnesota Statute 626.19, which restricts random surveillance and forbids facial recognition. The MPD presenters said video deemed evidentiary would be retained under state law while non-evidentiary footage would be deleted within the statute's retention windows; they also proposed a public-facing transparency dashboard showing flight reasons and times.

Concerns were wide-ranging. Council President Payne and others asked about vendor and cybersecurity vulnerabilities noted in public reporting; Payne urged caution about unknown risks and pointed to published security research on drone platforms. Vice Chair Stevenson warned of Fourth Amendment and civil-liberties implications, calling the idea at times reminiscent of "Big Brother," and the City Attorney reminded the committee that the city's ordinance requires a public hearing before acquiring surveillance technology or signing a procurement contract.

Councilmember Wonsley requested a staff memo and a post-trial cost analysis, noting the city's budget constraints and asking how an enterprise-wide contract might be funded if the pilot proves successful. Presenters said no comprehensive cost estimate has been developed yet, and that the 75-day trial is intended to test operational value and data collection before negotiating pricing and scale.

MPD and partner departments described planned operational constraints during the pilot: a drone pilot sitting in dispatch will decide whether a particular CAD call meets authorized statutory exceptions before launching a drone; a physical squad will still be dispatched during the trial; and flight logs would appear on the public dashboard within about 24 hours. Presenters said most initial flights would be used for high-priority 9-1-1 calls, with other departmental uses assessed as the pilot runs.

The committee did not approve a procurement at the meeting. City staff were asked to return with memos addressing cybersecurity risks, a plan for community engagement and the required public hearing, a cost analysis after the trial period, and details on oversight and retention policies.