The District Five Insider is a newsletter about the big decisions making their way through the City Council, what they mean for District Five, and how you can get involved. Enter your email and click subscribe to receive this newsletter in your mailbox.

Monday, March 2, 2026

Tonight’s Drone Vote: Why I believe regulation is the responsible path

Over the past several weeks, I’ve received many messages and calls urging a “no” vote on the Portland Police Department’s request to purchase a drone. These concerns are thoughtful, deeply felt, and they deserve a clear response.

For me, this decision is not about whether drones are “good” or “bad.” It’s about how we regulate their use here in Portland, and whether that regulation is under strong local control.

I’m weighing several things at once: community trust in a moment of federal overreach and fear; the reality that drones are already being used here in Portland; and my responsibility as a policymaker to regulate what already exists in practice.

Trust and Context

The recent ICE surge changed the emotional climate in our city. Even though that surge has been scaled back, a lot of fear and uncertainty remain. For many residents, distrust of surveillance and law enforcement has been a lived reality for generations. I know that policing and technology can disproportionately impact immigrant and Black and brown communities, and any expansion of law enforcement tools must be considered in that broader context.

That is precisely why I have spent the past two years working with City staff to strengthen the guardrails around this policy. If this technology is going to exist, it must operate under strict constitutional limits, clear use restrictions, and meaningful transparency.

What the Policy Now Requires

The current Standard Operating Procedure is significantly stronger than the original draft. It:

• Prohibits passive or warrantless surveillance
• Requires prosecutorial approval and a warrant (or recognized legal exception) for criminal investigations
• Limits use to defined public safety situations
• Mandates documentation and public reporting of each deployment
• Bans facial recognition
• Restricts enhancement technologies

The vote the council will take tonight will not give police a blank check, rather it proposes a tightly regulated framework designed to prevent misuse.

The Reality: Drones Are Already Being Used

Portland police already use drones by borrowing them from surrounding municipalities. When that happens, the other municipality’s policy governs the use. The data collected may be stored outside Portland’s control, and we have limited oversight over retention, deletion, or potential sharing.

Public Safety Considerations

Drones also have legitimate public safety applications. They can help locate missing persons more quickly, including people with dementia who may wander into wooded areas, assist with fire scene assessment without placing personnel at additional risk, and provide aerial visibility in hazardous or high-risk situations where distance can reduce escalation.

When properly regulated, this tool can protect both the public and first responders.

If a tool can help find someone faster, prevent unnecessary danger, or reduce escalation, I believe it should be available, under strict regulation and meaningful oversight. And I believe that here in Portland we are capable of being a model for that kind of regulation.

Governance in a Changing Technological Landscape

Trust in government is fragile right now, particularly for communities that have long experienced over-policing and surveillance. I take that seriously.

At the same time, technology will continue to evolve whether we welcome it or not. I believe it is our responsibility as policymakers to ensure democratic oversight keeps pace with that change. If we step back from setting rules, enforcing limits, and governing responsibly, we don’t strengthen trust, rather we erode the civic institutions that allow communities to shape their own future.

As always, I welcome your thoughts and continued conversation.

-Kate

ksykes@portlandmaine.gov 207-558-5764

Notice: Under Maine law, documents – including e-mails and text messages – in the possession of public officials or city employees about government business may be classified as public records. There are very few exceptions. As a result, please be advised that what is written in a text message or e-mail could be released to the public and/or the media if requested.