California Lawmakers Revive Statewide UAV Ban Legislation | Aero-News Network
Aero-News Network
RSS icon RSS feed
podcast icon MP3 podcast
Subscribe Aero-News e-mail Newsletter Subscribe

Airborne Unlimited -- Most Recent Daily Episodes

Episode Date

Airborne-Monday

Airborne-Tuesday

Airborne-Wednesday Airborne-Thursday

Airborne-Friday

Airborne On YouTube

Airborne-Unlimited-06.23.25

Airborne-NextGen-06.24.25

AirborneUnlimited-06.25.25

Airborne-AffordableFlyers-06.26.25

AirborneUnlimited-06.27.25

Wed, Jun 01, 2016

California Lawmakers Revive Statewide UAV Ban Legislation

Measure Approved By The State Senate Public Safety Committee

A California legislator has revived her efforts to put some kind of statewide ban on UAVs despite the objections of the industry and many users.

The California State Senate Public Safety Committee last week approved a bill introduced by Sen. Hannah-Beth Jackson (D-Santa Barbara) that would ban the flight of remotely piloted aircraft near airports and "critical infrastructure" in the state. During the hearing, Sen. Jackson said that the state "must develop some kind of approach to addressing this very exciting, but also very dangerous technology," according to a report appearing on the website Techwire.net.

Jackson sponsored similar legislation last year, but it was vetoed by CA Governor Jerry Brown. That law, which did pass the full legislature, would have banned all UAV flights over private property. In vetoing the bill, Brown said that the law would have exposed UAV users to "burdensome litigation and new causes of action."

The measure which passed the committee last week would ban UAV flight within 1000 feet of a heliport or five miles of an airport unless expressly permitted to do so. It would also prevent UAVs from flying within 500 feet of infrastructure such as bridges, power plants, hospitals, water facilities and oil refineries.

Critics say that the FAA has jurisdiction over the national airspace, and should be the rulemaking authority concerning UAVs. But Jackson said that "the FAA doesn't control everything, and the state has its responsibilities."

The law would carry fines of $250 to $1,000 or up to six months in jail.

(Image from file)

FMI: http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160SB868

Advertisement

More News

ANN's Daily Aero-Linx (06.29.25)

Aero Linx: Transport Canada We are a federal institution, leading the Transport Canada portfolio and working with our partners. Transport Canada is responsible for transportation p>[...]

ANN's Daily Aero-Term (06.29.25): Gross Navigation Error (GNE)

Gross Navigation Error (GNE) A lateral deviation from a cleared track, normally in excess of 25 Nautical Miles (NM). More stringent standards (for example, 10NM in some parts of th>[...]

Classic Aero-TV: Anticipating Futurespace - Blue Origin Visits Airventure 2017

From AirVenture 2017 (YouTube Edition): Flight-Proven Booster On Display At AirVenture… EAA AirVenture Oshkosh is known primarily as a celebration of experimental and amateu>[...]

NTSB Final Report: Cirrus SR22

Aircraft Parachute System (CAPS) Was Deployed About 293 Ft Above Ground Level, Which Was Too Low To Allow For Full Deployment Of The Parachute System Analysis: The day before the a>[...]

Airborne Affordable Flyers 06.26.25: PA18 Upgrades, ‘Delta Force’, Rhinebeck

Also: 48th Annual Air Race Classic, Hot Air Balloon Fire, FAA v Banning 100LL, Complete Remote Pilot The news Piper PA-18 Super Cub owners have been waiting for has finally arrived>[...]

blog comments powered by Disqus



Advertisement

Advertisement

Podcasts

Advertisement

© 2007 - 2025 Web Development & Design by Pauli Systems, LC