Minneapolis police drone debate draws packed crowds concerned about privacy



A woman holds a sign that reads 'More surveillance does not equal more safety.

By Mohamed Ibrahim, Sahan Journal

This story comes to you from Sahan Journal, a nonprofit newsroom dedicated to providing authentic news reporting about Minnesota's new immigrants and refugees. MPR News is a partner with Sahan Journal and will be sharing stories between SahanJournal.com and MPRNews.org.

Dozens of community members flooded Minneapolis City Hall Wednesday to express concerns about a proposed drone program for Minneapolis police.

Nearly 50 people signed up to speak at the City Council’s public health, safety and equity committee meeting. Residents filled all of the seats in the council chambers reserved for the public, and an overflow room next door.

“We just spent months enduring a brutal winter of military-equipped federal occupation and terrorization, and on the heels of that, you wish to provide military-grade drone tech to the cops in our already over-surveilled neighborhoods?” said north Minneapolis resident Will Reely, referring to federal immigration enforcement during Operation Metro Surge. “You can’t be serious.”

Speakers said they don’t trust how the police would use drones, and are concerned the technology could be used as surveillance and lead to invasion of privacy.

Several people also sat in the hallway outside of the council chambers and streamed the hearing. The 1:30 p.m. meeting began with Minneapolis police officials outlining a free, 75-day pilot program that would allow the police department to use drones as “first responders.”

The committee moved to put the pilot program for a vote before the full council on July 16, which will not feature an additional public comment period on the issue. Should the council approve the program, the trial period would begin as soon as July 20.

The project would be conducted in the police department’s Fourth Precinct on the city’s north side, and hopes to reduce 911 response times by using drones to livestream video of potential crime scenes before officers arrive. The drones, which would be equipped with parachutes, police markings and lights, would be provided by Skydio, a California company.

Several community members noted that Skydio is known to supply drones to the Israeli government, which has used the technology during their military campaign against Palestinian civilians in Gaza.

“We see them as weapons of war and mass surveillance, and do not want them to be used to kill or control people at home or abroad,” Minneapolis resident Meredith Aby said of Skydio drones. “The people of Minneapolis do not want Skydio’s blood on its hands.”

A view of a city council hall.
Residents packed a Minneapolis City Council committee meeting on July 8, 2026, about a proposed pilot program that would allow Minneapolis police to use drones to respond to 911 calls before officers arrive.
Dymanh Chhoun | Sahan Journal

More speakers questioned whether Minneapolis police would use the drones for the intended purpose, and questioned whether their use would actually improve safety.

“What I don’t understand is why we would implement a drone program under the guise of public safety,” Avery Winters told council members. “We the people don’t trust the people or the system administering this.”

Before the public comment period, Minneapolis police officials presented the pilot program to the City Council committee, saying that it would improve officer and community safety and help with staffing challenges. Andy Skoogman, chief of staff for the city’s Office of Community Safety, said officers can use drones to determine whether they need to report to a scene, improving the department’s efficiency.

“Drones are not a replacement for police officers, for firefighters, for EMS [Emergency Medical Services] personnel or other first responders,” Skoogman, who is not a police officer, told council members. “They’re simply a tool that helps ensure the right resources are sent to the right call at the right time.”

Thomas Campbell, deputy chief of patrol in Minneapolis police’s special operations division, said the drones would be operated remotely, would only be activated at potential crime scenes, and that their cameras would be pointed away from private property. Footage that isn’t considered evidence would be deleted after seven days, he said.

Minneapolis police have been using drones for other purposes since 2022, and have a fleet of 29 drones. Officers currently launch drones from the trunks of their squad cars, and deploy them after they’ve been requested by officers who are already present at a scene. The proposed program would allow drones to scope out a scene before officers arrive.

Minnesota law allows local police departments to use drones without a search warrant in specific cases:

  • during or in the aftermath of an emergency situation that involves the risk of death or bodily harm to a person;

  • at a public event where there is heightened risk to the safety of attendees;

  • to collect information from a public area if there is reasonable suspicion of criminal activity, among other situations;

  • to document evidence that is at imminent risk of destruction;

  • to search for a missing person;

  • to counter the risk of a terrorist attack by a specific individual or organization if the agency determines that credible intelligence indicates a risk;

  • to prevent the loss of life and property in natural or man-made disasters and to facilitate operational planning, rescue, and recovery operations in the aftermath of these disasters;

  • over a private area with the written consent of the occupant or a public area, for officer training or public relations purposes;

  • to collect information for crash reconstruction purposes after a serious or deadly collision occurring on a public road;

  • to conduct a threat assessment in anticipation of a specific event;

  • for purposes unrelated to law enforcement at the request of a government entity provided that the government entity makes the request in writing to the law enforcement agency and specifies the reason for the request and proposed period of use.

Ward 4 City Council Member LaTrisha Vetaw, who represents the area where the pilot program would occur, wrote a legislative directive this spring that prompted the program. At the end of Wednesday’s meeting, she reassured community members that the goal is to reduce response times and limit police interactions with the public.

“This is not surveillance,” Vetaw said. “Someone has to call in for the drone to be dispatched, and the dashboard will be set up where people can track how the drone was being used and what for during the service.”

Committee members asked a few technical questions during the hearing about how the drone program would work, but several of them said they were saving more discussion and personal views of the program for the full council vote next week.



Source link

Leave a Reply

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Get our latest articles delivered straight to your inbox. No spam, we promise.

Recent Reviews


25 AI employees who talk to each other and run my company without me.

Most CEOs don’t have time to play with AI.

Maybe they use ChatGPT to write an email or as a sparring partner, but that’s about it.

And I get it. Between back-to-back meetings, managing people, and putting out fires, when are you supposed to sit down and experiment?

But a few months ago, I started playing with agents, and it’s changed the way I think about scaling a company.

Baby Steps

It started with a single agent I built in Claude Cowork. It was a super-powered EA, which read my emails, checked my calendar, and gave me a morning brief. It helped me manage my to-do list, clarify my priorities, and set reminders.

It was really helpful. But what I really wanted was a full support team.

I wanted multiple agents, talking to each other, running on their own schedules, and working without me needing to be involved.

So I started building my own AI organisation. Finance, marketing, sales, strategy and relationship management… even Agent Resources (the HR equivalent).

Department by department, role by role, the organisation started to grow.

Burning the Ships

As more and more work was being taken on by agents, it became clear I didn’t need as large a support team.

So I took the decision to ramp down my human org, and invest in creating more agents.

Like Cortés, I burned the ships so there was no chance of retreat, and this forced me to figure out how to make an AI organisation work.

What used to be run by a Chief of Staff, a Head of Ops, and a Founder Associate is now run by my AI organisation and an EA.

I currently have 25 AI employees which cost about $2,500 a year to run. They replace over $250,000 a year in salaries, along with several SaaS tools I no longer use.

My AI employees manage accounts receivable and financial projects. They analyse my social media and create new pieces of content for my review. They proactively draft emails to help me build important relationships. 

I estimate I’ve got a 100X return on investment on my Claude Max plan.

How to Build an AI Support Team

Within a year or two, every leader will have their own AI organisation, each designed to fit the way they think and work.

When I show CEOs what I’ve built, their reaction is always the same: “I want this.”

So how do you go about building your AI support team?

Here are the three stages, although in practice they overlap a lot.

Stage 1: Connect Your Data

Before your agents can do anything useful, they need your knowledge.

You’ll need to connect your emails, meeting transcripts, data from your existing systems.

This stage is brutal, especially if you need to give the system historical data.

I spent entire nights feeding in data one chunk at a time, taking care not to overload the models with too much context.

Stage 2: Build the Workflows aka. Employees

Each AI employee is a workflow: a prompt that outlines a set of instructions, data it can access, and the output it creates.

Creating workflows is when things start to feel exciting.

You watch your first agent produce real work, and your brain starts firing with ideas for the next one.

It’s quite addictive.

Stage 3: Get Your Employees to Work Together

It turns out many of the challenges of building an AI organisation are the same as a human one.

For example, my Chief of Staff acts as a messenger between me and my other AI employees. It reads all their reports, keeps track of what’s happening across the organisation.

But a few weeks in, the volume of reports generated by AI employees grew out of control.

One day, my AI Chief of Staff said to me: “Dave, there’s a lot for me to read. Do you really need me to read every single report?”

In other words, it was overwhelmed.

We want our chiefs of staff (human or AI) to be our interface with the world, but we often forget how much context this requires.

This led us to redesign our reporting systems, and create some Python scripts to make the work more efficient.

Be Careful With Subagents

Another familiar problem came from how AI agents spawn subagents to do things in parallel.

One evening, I’d kicked off a CRM project. About fifteen minutes in, I checked the progress and realised I hadn’t been clear enough.

I stopped the process and asked the agent to ‘undo’ what it had done.

A minute later, I looked at my data folders, and half of them were missing. As in deleted.

“Where are my files?” I asked, as beads of sweat started to form on my brow.

“This is my fault. The subagents overwrote the data files. I’m sorry.”

You’re sorry?

It turns out your agents will “subcontract” out their work to subagents… except these subagents don’t have the full context and often make mistakes.

Also, they aren’t the tidiest of agents either, often leaving random summary files littered around your filing system.

Luckily, my files were in Dropbox so I was able to recover the 571 files it deleted.

The Agents Are Coming

Now, someone skilled at building agent systems can do the work of dozens, maybe even hundreds of people.

I’m about a month away from having an AI organisation that can run my business with only minor involvement from me.

However, this poses a real challenge for CEOs.

In The Innovator’s Dilemma, Clay Christensen shows that incumbents get disrupted not because they make bad decisions, but because they make good ones.

They keep investing in what’s working today and rationally ignore the scrappy new thing that isn’t good enough yet.

Until it is.

For many CEOs, right now keeping their people is a good decision. AI agents aren’t reliable enough to replace a great team.

But within just a few years, smaller teams who leverage agents will outperform larger teams who don’t.

So if you haven’t started building with agents yet, consider this your permission to start.

Related Reading: 

 

Originally published on April 1st, 2026

 





Source link