Outcry Over Worcester Police Drone Program At First Public Hearing

WORCESTER, MA — A Worcester City Council subcommittee on Wednesday held the city's first public hearing over a police request to buy a drone, with dozens speaking against the proposal, expressing concerns about everything from surveillance of the homeless to the lack of a formal policy governing drone use.

The City Council Public Safety Subcommittee, chaired by At-Large Councilor Kate Toomey, took on the issue after police forwarded the proposal to councilors in early April. And although councilors heard feedback from the public, City Attorney Michael Traynor said City Manager Ed Augustus Jr. would ultimately decide whether to buy a drone — not councilors.

"There's no formal approval or veto power for city council in this process," Traynor said. "The manager doesn't make a decision until after all the public testimony."

Worcester Police Chief Steven Sargent has said the department would buy a drone using $25,000 out of a $100,000 earmark from the state fiscal year 2022 appropriations budget. The money is from a larger $4.4 million pot from the Executive Office of Public Safety set aside for various "public safety projects and grant programs" across the state.

Police had described the drone money in recent weeks as a "grant," but Deputy Chief Paul Saucier said during the meeting he was mistaken in describing the money that way. The line item in the state budget did not specify that the money should go toward buying a drone.

"[N]ot less than $100,000 shall be expended to the police department in the city of Worcester for public safety improvements, including the purchase of an explosive ordnance disposal canine, or EOD K-9, a canine vehicle and de-escalation equipment," the appropriation line item says.

State Sen. Michael Moore, who got the earmark for Worcester police, said the "de-escalation equipment" description was purposefully vague. Moore said Sargent had previously been undecided about whether to use the state money for a drone or new Tasers.

Saucier said drones are, in fact, de-escalation tools because they can be used to find armed people hiding in the woods or barricaded in a home without sending in officers.

"There probably is not a better device than a [drone] in order to defuse a situation," he said.

A main issue for residents and officials opposed to the drone is how it would be used with homeless residents. Sargent's first memo sent to councilors on April 5 said a drone "would be of assistance to the city's Quality of Life Team when searching for homeless encampments."

In a followup sent Wednesday, Sargent elaborated that the drone "could assist work practitioners with making in-person contact with individuals in hard to reach locations of the city."

District 5 Councilor Etel Haxhiaj invited representatives from AIDS Project Worcester and the National Homelessness Law Center to speak about how a drone could harm the homeless. She also pushed for excluding the homeless from any drone use.

"My recommendation and strong suggestion would be to strike any connection, any request for this drone to be used in any way shape or form for the un-housed community," she said during the Wednesday meeting.

AIDS Project Worcester, whose employees do outreach in the local homeless community, opposed the drone program, highlighting that police and outreach workers are already well aware of where homeless camps are.

"[W]e cannot wholesomely support the use of drones to provide services to these individuals," AIDS Project Worcester said. "By employing the use of drones, the homeless population will further lose trust in the police, as they will now feel as though they need further protection from displacement. Is this the message we want to send?"

National Homelessness Law Center legal director Eric Tars said the only proven way to help people living outdoors is through trained outreach workers, not drones.

"The UAS program’s application to searching for and tracking homeless encampments and the program’s potential to invite law enforcement responses to homelessness is likely to erode community trust in government, exacerbate and prolong homelessness in Worcester by displacing and criminalizing encampment residents rather than connecting them to trauma-informed services and providing adequate housing, and violate the constitutional and human rights of people experiencing homelessness," Tars said.

Another criticism expressed during the meeting was the lack of a policy for drone use. Saucier and Sargent both said they could not create a policy before buying the drone. Whatever drone the department gets, Saucier said police would likely use the International Association of Police Chief's model policy on the devices.

Resident Kevin Ksen said it was "ludicrous" for the department not to have a policy before buying the drone. He highlighted that Worcester created a policy on dog parks before building the first one.

Emiliano Falcon-Morano, the policy counsel for the Technology for Liberty Program at the ACLU of Massachusetts, advised officials to make sure police have a policy in place before acquiring a drone.

"The ACLU therefore recommends that the city council urge the city manager not to approve the use of this technology until a comprehensive and civil liberties focused policy regulating the use of drones is submitted to the city manager, city council, and the general public," he said.

At the end of Wednesday's meeting, At-Large Councilor Donna Colorio said a majority of the comments were opposed to drones — and said she hoped more residents would come out in support of drones at the council's next meeting on the issue.

The Public Safety Subcommittee did not take action on the drone proposal. Toomey said drones would be up for discussion at Tuesday's main city council meeting, as well as the next public safety subcommittee meeting.