Reports from residents spotting what appear to be surveillance planes over the city have sparked fresh concern about aerial monitoring programs that operate with little to no public transparency. As one SF resident bluntly put it: "This is evil."

Dramatic? Maybe. But the sentiment isn't unfounded.

Law enforcement agencies — federal, state, and local — have a well-documented history of deploying aerial surveillance over American cities, often equipped with high-resolution cameras, cell-site simulators (commonly called Stingrays), and other monitoring technology. The FBI, DHS, and even local police departments have used small aircraft to conduct sweeping surveillance operations, sometimes without warrants and almost always without public notice.

San Francisco, to its credit, passed a surveillance technology ordinance back in 2019 requiring city agencies to get Board of Supervisors approval before acquiring or using surveillance tech. But here's the catch — federal agencies aren't bound by local ordinances. They can fly whatever they want, whenever they want, and they don't owe City Hall a phone call.

That's the core problem. It's not about whether law enforcement should ever use aerial tools — sometimes there are legitimate public safety reasons. It's about the complete absence of accountability. No disclosure requirements. No public debate. No warrant requirement visible to the people being watched.

In a city that prides itself on civil liberties, we should be asking harder questions. Who authorized the flight? What data was collected? How long is it retained? Who has access?

Freedom isn't just a bumper sticker. It means the government doesn't get to watch you from 10,000 feet without explaining why.