California Governor Jerry Brown vetoed a bill that would require warrants for drone surveillance by police.

Brown is the latest of lawmakers in the country to pick a side on the issue, which often highlights the clash of a potentially powerful police tool with privacy concerns of residents, the Wall Street Journal reported.

Brown said the reason for vetoing the measure was due to a too-narrow list of exceptions, and he believes the bill imposed restrictions that interfered with higher levels of authority.

The exceptions for police drone use without a warrant included emergencies, such as fires or hostage situations, but it also included non-criminal intelligence gathering. The only relief from the gathering of that footage was a rule that it would have to be destroyed within a year.

But as lawmakers grapple with the issue at a local and state level, the Federal Aviation Administration has been tackling approvals on an almost case-by-case basis.

Last week they authorized the use of drones for six filmmaking companies, and have previously allowed several colleges to use them to collect data that would benefit the federal government.

Colleges in Virginia, Texas and Florida have all been granted approvals for certain drone uses.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation has published a list of known drone applicants and their statuses on their website.

The Wall Street Journal reported that since 2013, 20 states have enacted laws on drone use, some of which place restrictions on police and law enforcement use, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

While some law enforcement agreed that their should be restrictions, others said it should not only apply to police.

Elk Grove Police Chief Robert Lehner, told WSJ, "Those restrictions don't exist on helicopters and aircraft; to single out a tool that's essentially doing the same thing, it doesn't make a lot of sense. Drones should be subject to the same evidentiary framework as all other aerial surveillance."