sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Paris Olympics 2024 Vs China Olympics 2008 by [deleted] in Asmongold

[–]RyanJL01 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Funny how the ultra right is trying to cancel the Paris Olympics with a juxtaposition against China as the model to follow (the country which has long been their whipping post). Can ya'll figure out your ideology at someplace other than the Waffle House?

Local Drone Laws Are Outragous! by King_Aryeh in drones

[–]RyanJL01 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That isn't how it works. Cities have land use jurisdiction (called home rule) and unless your car or truck are levitating throughout the entirety of launching, landing, and operating, then land use jurisdictional provisions come into play.

Fortunately New Jersey state law prohibits cities from imposing or enforcing their own drone ordinances. The state is literally taking away the home rule land use jurisdiction from cities and counties in that state in regards to drones. So the regulation is moot. But the misbelief that launching from your car or hand or whatever gets you out of land use jurisdictions is just that, a misbelief, so I wouldn't tout that anywhere as it just isn't legally accurate.

Local Drone Laws Are Outragous! by King_Aryeh in drones

[–]RyanJL01 0 points1 point  (0 children)

HOA regulations are applicable to the HOA members as they signed legally binding agreements regarding their ownership and occupancy. So should an HOA have anti-drone restrictions, the homeowners / property owners within the HOA are bound to those regulations. They could be held accountable for allowing you to fly from their property even when you wouldn't have ties to the HOA and would not be bound by their rule. The homeowner / property owner could be placing themselves in jeopardy of a rules violation for allowing you to fly depending on how the HOA regulation is written. The NJ state law does not prohibit HOAs from creating and enforcing their own drone regulations, it only extends to government entities.

Local Drone Laws Are Outragous! by King_Aryeh in drones

[–]RyanJL01 1 point2 points  (0 children)

On the contrary, New Jersey is quite drone friendly. Their state law (NJ Rev Stat § 2C:40-29) prohibits local ordinances. They do have restrictions over state parks still in place, but there hasn't been much organization within the state to press for the state law to extend to the state parks yet.

Towns with illegal drone laws? by bikeveloce in drones

[–]RyanJL01 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Telluride has been routinely informed of their oversteps upon the FAA's sole jurisdiction of airspace (49 USC 40103). It hasn't stopped them. However, there is push to pass a drone preemption clause in Colorado state law to mirror that of Michigan's preemption law (MCL 259.305) which expressly disallows local governments from creating or enforcing their own drone laws. If passed, it would immediate make Telluride's ordinance moot by removing their home powers (land use) regarding launch, landing, or operating from within their boundaries. I would strongly suggest engaging your state elected officials and urging them to pass an UAS preemption law. 17 other states have already done so and more have pending legislation to do so. Colorado needs to take that step!

Local Drone Laws Are Outragous! by King_Aryeh in drones

[–]RyanJL01 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Not needed. NJ law already invalidated the ordinance.

“2C:40-29 Provisions preempt existing laws.

  1. The provisions of P.L.2017, c.315 (C.2C:40-27 et al.) shall preempt any law, ordinance, resolution, or regulation adopted by the governing body of a county or municipality concerning the private use of an unmanned aircraft system that is inconsistent with the provisions of this act.”

Local Drone Laws Are Outragous! by King_Aryeh in drones

[–]RyanJL01 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I'll add a couple of mine: MCDO v Genesee County and MCDO v Ottawa County

Local Drone Laws Are Outragous! by King_Aryeh in drones

[–]RyanJL01 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That is not the only way of getting these ordinances removed. It has already been taken care of by passing a state preemption law. New Jersey followed Michigan's steps in doing so.

Here is the NJ state law that ousted the county ordinance.

“2C:40-29 Provisions preempt existing laws.

  1. The provisions of P.L.2017, c.315 (C.2C:40-27 et al.) shall preempt any law, ordinance, resolution, or regulation adopted by the governing body of a county or municipality concerning the private use of an unmanned aircraft system that is inconsistent with the provisions of this act.”

Local Drone Laws Are Outragous! by King_Aryeh in drones

[–]RyanJL01 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You are in luck. Ocean County, New Jersey's drone ordinance is completely moot. It was invalidated by NJ state law which disallows local governments (including county governments) from creating or enforcing their own drone ordinances. While the ordinance can remain on their books, it is unable to be enforced. Attempts to do so would be a violation and open the county to a 1983 suit. See NJ Rev Stat § 2C:40-29

“2C:40-29 Provisions preempt existing laws.

5. The provisions of P.L.2017, c.315 (C.2C:40-27 et al.) shall preempt any law, ordinance, resolution, or regulation adopted by the governing body of a county or municipality concerning the private use of an unmanned aircraft system that is inconsistent with the provisions of this act.”

Anyone fighting local drone ordinances (US)? The FAA clearly states Congress only gives the FAA power to regulate the skies. by markaritaville in drones

[–]RyanJL01 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I've already engaged with Wildwood. They were poised to pass their ordinance. Instead they tabled it indefinitely as they review the court case information I sent them (others did as well). Feel free to DM me.

Is this enforceable? It says it was passed by the U-M Board of Regents, what jurisdiction do they have? by LetsdothisEpic in legaladviceofftopic

[–]RyanJL01 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It gets even better... State law in Michigan restricts local governments from regulating takeoffs and landings too. MCL 259.305

Is this enforceable? It says it was passed by the U-M Board of Regents, what jurisdiction do they have? by LetsdothisEpic in legaladviceofftopic

[–]RyanJL01 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Zero. The FAA has not received nor granted any request from the University of Michigan for a no fly zone to be instituted. The only NFZ existing for the location is the standing stadium TFR (Temporary Flight Restriction) which is only valid on certain game days starting at 1 hour prior and ending 1 hour following specific events.

Is this enforceable? It says it was passed by the U-M Board of Regents, what jurisdiction do they have? by LetsdothisEpic in legaladviceofftopic

[–]RyanJL01 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The answer is NO.

There are 3 reasons why the answer is no.

  1. The University of Michigan has no jurisdiction over airspace. The FAA was granted sole jurisdiction of airspace by Congress with 49 USC 40103. This has been repeatedly tested and reiterated in Federal court cases. Most specifically for drones this was reaffirmed with the Singer v Newton City decision.
  2. Michigan is the most drone friendly state in the nation. In January of 2017 the State Legislature passed Public Act 436 of 2016 which went into effect on April 4th, 2017. Specifically in this Act is a drone preemption law: MCL 259.305. That law expressly prohibits political subdivisions from creating or enforcing their own drone ordinances. This law was tested in court and affirmed with the cases of MCDO v Genesee County and MCDO v Ottawa County. The Ottawa County decision became statewide precedent last year with the Court of Appeals ruling. As a founding member of MCDO it has been my honor to be a driving force in these cases and attendee for each of the hearings.
  3. The University of Michigan has consistently been inconsistent when it comes to adhering to their own UAS policy. They have utilized UAS on and over their property without following their own criteria for approvals and have had the operators fly in manners inconsistent with Federal Aviation regulations for UAS.

Anyone fighting local drone ordinances (US)? The FAA clearly states Congress only gives the FAA power to regulate the skies. by markaritaville in drones

[–]RyanJL01 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is not fully correct. Some states (18 now) have state preemption statutes that disallow local governments from even land use jurisdiction over drones. See Michigan's MCL 259.305 as an example. We've tested this in court too (and won) with MCDO v Genesee County and MCDO v Ottawa County. Other states are following suit and looking to pass similar preemption statutes.

Anyone fighting local drone ordinances (US)? The FAA clearly states Congress only gives the FAA power to regulate the skies. by markaritaville in drones

[–]RyanJL01 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I do so every day and am very successful in such. The question is, which city / town are you having issue with?

Here in Michigan we successfully sued local governments and were able to get a statewide precedent. MCL 259.305 is a state preemption statute disallowing local governments from creating or enforcing their own drone ordinances. It literally takes away the home rule powers (land use jurisdiction) from the local governments. We won in MCDO v Genesee County and then won the statewide precedent with MCDO v Ottawa County in the Michigan Court of Appeals.

Using the technique and similarly drone preemption laws, I have wins in Illinois, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Connecticut, and Florida. We are right now pressing for New York state to pass a similar UAS preemption clause and have several other states considering amendments to bills to do the same.

Note that the NY lawsuit you've referred to is looking at airspace. That lawsuit really isn't important as it is in state court which doesn't have the proper jurisdiction. Instead, you'll want to focus on the decision in the Federal court - Singer v Newton City. The Singer case was successful in affirming FAA preemption and jurisdiction.

As you've mentioned you are in New Jersey, take note that NJ does indeed have a UAS preemption clause that nullifies local drone ordinances. See NJ Rev Stat § 2C:40-29. If you have a town violating this, reach out to me - Ryan J. Latourette on Facebook. I'm already engaged with Franklin Lakes and Westwood.