WHITEHALL, Ohio (WCMH) – The city of Whitehall approved the purchase of a $49,000 drone, despite concerns from some councilmembers and community members.

The ordinance was approved on Oct. 1 with five votes in favor and two against. Citizens commenting under the council meeting’s livestream did not feel all their questions were answered, and neither did councilmember Gerald Dixon.

Many of these questions revolved around citizen privacy protections. The day of the vote, Dixon, who voted against the ordinance, said he thought city council should understand what the drone policy would look like more clearly before voting. Several councilmembers pushed back against Dixon during the meeting and said they trusted police leadership to know what the department needed.

“Now that the legislation to purchase the drone has passed, while I may speak out for or against it in the future, it is a done deal for now,” Dixon said on Oct. 8. “They wanted no input on policies before the vote. I’m certain my thoughts on policy post-vote will receive the same consideration.”

The councilmembers who did not vote in favor of the drone both voted to postpone the vote to provide more time to answer questions, but the motion was struck down.

A formal policy has not yet been implemented, but Whitehall Police Chief Mike Crispen said the drone will have similar regulations to other police recording systems like body cameras and license plate readers.

Crispen said the drone will be dispatched with supervisor approval and clarified any use will be documented with user identification to maintain a record in the case of any misuse. Crispen said if there were any violations, the officer behind them would be subject to discipline.

“I am aware that a few people are concerned with it; they have every right to be cautious and protective of their privacy rights,” Crispen said. “As such, I can only reaffirm my commitment to ensuring the drone program, as well as everything we do, is in line with sound Constitutional principles rooted in civil liberties.”

The company behind the technology, Paladin, also offers sample policy for cities implementing drones. The morning of the vote, Dixon said his requests to see these policies had not been fulfilled.

As an assurance, Crispen said the drone’s camera must be activated to record, and that when it is en route, its camera points to the horizon rather than down toward private property. According to Paladin’s website, company policies state the drone is “never” allowed to be used unless it is a direct response to a 911 call about an emergency.

The hefty price tag, paid out of a police trust fund, was an additional concern for those with questions about the investment. The day of the vote, Dixon said he had not been told the drone purchase would be an annual – rather than one-time – $49,000 fee, and only found out from NewsNation local affiliate WCMH.

Citizen commenters raised questions as to where future funding may come from. During council’s discussion, supporters in favor of the drone argued they did not have to renew it for another year if they did not feel it was worth the cost.

“Until or unless it appears in the budget, I’m sure my thoughts and concerns will fall on deaf ears,” Dixon said. “In Whitehall, unless you’re part of the status quo, you’re really nothing.”

Whitehall is not the first central Ohio agency to implement drones in its police force. In 2017, the Franklin County Sheriff’s Office was one of only four law enforcement agencies in the country to use drones as part of its force. The drones are used by the sheriff’s office to help with searches and provide overwatch, such as when officers used the drone to locate two lost hunters and lead them to safety.

According to the ACLU, more than 1,400 police departments used drones as of July 2023. 

Crispen said the division is actively working with Paladin to schedule training and installation, with no formal dates set but an optimistic timeline of implementing the program by November.