By Marcelle Dibrell

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Northern California has filed a lawsuit against Sonoma County for conducting warrantless surveillance of residents’ homes and private lives.

The lawsuit was filed on behalf of three longtime Sonoma County residents, who say that the county has used drones to target and record details about residents, their homes, and their backyard pools and spas, all without a warrant.

Plaintiffs Nichola Schmitz, Benjamin Verdusco, and Suzanne Brock, unrelated area homeowners, say the county has been using drones equipped with high-powered cameras to surreptitiously monitor and record fenced-in yards, swimming pools and hot tubs, and areas under awnings or through curtainless windows.

According to the lawsuit, since 2019, the Code Enforcement Section (CES) of Sonoma County’s Permit Sonoma agency has deployed drones more than 700 times to conduct civil code enforcement, during which inspectors have captured at least 5,600 images. Attorneys say the county subjected residents to invasive warrantless drone surveillance,

American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), files lawsuit on behalf of 3 homeowners who claim airborne surveillance violates their right of privacy. violated their constitutional rights, and caused significant disruptions to their lives as a result.

Nichola Schmitz, who is deaf, didn’t notice the intrusion in her backyard until a worker on her property pointed out that a drone was hovering overhead on October 10, 2023. Schmitz said that she then ran to her bedroom and closed the windows, afraid that the drone would peer in. She worried that the drone had captured images of her earlier that day when she had used her spa while naked.

“This horrible experience has shattered my sense of privacy and security,” Schmitz said. “I’m afraid to open my blinds or go outside to use my hot tub because who knows when the county’s drone could be spying on me.”

Shortly after that incident, Schmitz received notice that she was being cited for two violations on her property: one for illegal grading and one for an unpermitted dwelling, a small cabin her now-deceased father had built in 1981.

Confused about how the county had obtained evidence about the violations, Schmitz repeatedly asked county officials about drones. The officials evaded the line of questioning, the complaint states. It was only after about a year that a county official told her by email: “There was a single flyover from the public right of way (not over the property) on October 10, 2023 by Code Enforcement to confirm/deny the allegations of construction without permit for the sheds. The flyover was conducted according to policy. Any other flyovers were not done by Code Enforcement. No warrant was obtained or required by law.”

By that time, Schmitz’s costs had multiplied, forcing her to pay approximately $25,000 in contractor and permitting costs to resolve the grading issue, while facing a lien on her property and the threat of court. The issue with her father’s cabin could still cost her $10,000.

Benjamin Verdusco was surveilled twice without a warrant or notice at his property in 2021 and 2022 where his family often had pool parties, evidenced by drone pictures taken of his property.

Verdusco later learned that the drone photos led to an inspection of his property because he had been growing more than six CBD hemp plants. Ultimately, the Verdusco’s sold the property at a loss.

“The Verduscos had bought the property envisioning it as their future home, but CES surveillance upended their plans for the future,” the complaint states. “They were exhausted from the stress and distrust that CES’s warrantless drone surveillance imposed on their lives.”

The third plaintiff, Suzanne Brock, lives with her special-needs daughter on a large property where they have an enclosed garden with an outdoor bathtub and shower, which they used every day. On May 2, 2024, CES began conducting warrantless inspections on their property, capturing at least 19 photos including detailed images of the bathtub and shower, but Brock didn’t find out about the drones or their images until eight months later. Brock met with CES officials on March 7, 2025, to express concern that inspectors may have seen her naked in the bathtub.

According to the complaint, Brock hasn’t used her outdoor bathing area since then and “cannot comfortably enjoy or fully relax at her property now because she knows CES could be watching her without her knowledge.”

The lawsuit goes on to state that Sonoma County officials concealed the existence of the drone program from the public, the press, and the courts. They used drone photos to issue notices of violations, rarely disclosing that their evidence was captured by drones, the lawsuit states.

The ACLU cautioned that other jurisdictions across California may use drones unless they are restrained by the courts.

The plaintiffs are seeking declaratory and injunctive relief, a halt to taxpayer funding of the warrantless drone program, and an order requiring a warrant to conduct surveillance on residents and their homes.

“Sonoma County’s warrantless drone surveillance program violates the California Constitution, which guarantees the people’s affirmative right to privacy and right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government,” the lawsuit states.