Friday, June 29, 2012

Unusually effective

The Mayor, City Councilman Jon Camp and I all received an email yesterday from a disgruntled citizen who is upset to learn that he must pay a $25 annual fee to register his residential alarm system.  He opined that the two-year old ordinance changes here in Lincoln would do nothing to reduce false alarms.  I've given several updates on this topic here on my blog before, but here is the response I sent him:
"The Mayor's Office has asked me to respond to your email about your disagreements with the City's alarm registration and excess false alarm ordinances.  Ordinances of this type are virtually universal in cities of Lincoln's size.  We have a fairly conservative ordinance, in that the cost of registration is comparatively low, the number of "free" false alarms comparatively high, and the fee for excess false alarms comparatively low.  These ordinance changes were adopted to both decrease false alarms and to place more of the cost for responding to false alarms on the users of such systems, rather than the general taxpayers.   
With respect to the impact of more restrictive false alarm ordinances in our region and in Lincoln, I can assure you these policies have made a significant difference. As a practical matter, over the past several years alarm companies have instituted procedures to verify alarms more effectively, and to provide better training and support to customers in order to avoid an excessive number of false alarms at a business or residence.  Since our peak year, The number of false alarms in Lincoln has declined by more than 2,000 per year, a 45% reduction.  The number of addresses with  five or more false alarms during a calendar year has decreased by 82%, from a peak of 242 to only 44 last year.  This has occurred despite the fact that Lincoln's population continues to grow by about 3,600 per year.  
From my standpoint, these are certainly impressive results.  Each false alarm results in the dispatch of at least two police officers, and officers are typically tied up on an alarm anywhere from 30 minutes to an hour or more.  Since we respond to alarms in an emergency driving condition, there is also a risk to both the officers' safety and that of other motorists. Reducing false alarms both conserves resources and improves safety.  I regret the fact that you disagree with this public policy decision by our elected officials, but I wanted you to know why I continue to support this approach to alarm registration and excess false alarm fees. "

9 comments:

Anonymous said...

We have them here, in Mobile, AL. I think it's 3 alarms and a $500.oo fine. May be wrong on the amount, but it definitely stings. Agree with all your reasons. A necessary policy.

Steve said...

I would not be opposed to higher fines for false alarms, but I'd like to know more about the $25 registration fee.

I'm not sure how these systems work, so I'm also not sure of the need or reasons for registration. If it is necessary in order for a proper response by police (or fire department), then of course, it would need to be registered or it wouldn't be much good. However, if it is simply a fee which goes to help cover the costs of false alarms, I think it should be reduced or eliminated and replaced with higher fines for false alarms. Why should someone who maintains their system and does not produce false alarms have to subsidize others who don't? If we can do a background check and issue a permit to purchase a handgun for five dollars, I'd think we could register a security alarm for that price, too.

Again, I don't know all the facts here. If it actually costs the city $25 to cover the administration of the system, so be it.

Anonymous said...

It's my responsibility to make sure that my alarm system is in good working order, set up intelligently, and also operated properly. Power outages might give me a trip that isn't my fault, but it is definitely my fault if someone is too dim-witted to remember their keypad code, too slow to enter it, too slow to exit the area before it arms, or hangs a promo banner where it will wave in the ventilation system air currents so that it will trip a motion detector.

Anonymous said...

In Virginia Beach VA it's $150 after two false alarms and $150 for each false alarm that city police respond to. The CVB Police website says they respond to 22,000 false alarms (commercial and residential) a year.

Michelle said...

I'll second that! You are singing my song Director. In my jurisdiction, the number of individual users who have false alarms has stayed consistent for several years, but the number of alarm systems has grown dramatically. Thank goodness that it is a relatively small number who have issues or the problem would be out of control. I find it funny how some citizens get more upset about losing the first uncharged alarm than people do over getting a fine. Ordinances are only as good as the enforcement and we are seeing the number of alarms drop as my unit implements the previously unenforced components of our ordinance.

Steve said...

My only issue with the fees and fines regarding alarm systems is concerning the registration fee. I'm not sure of the purpose of registration. If it is necessary in order for police and fire agencies to have the information they need to properly respond to an alarm, I have no problem with registration, but the fee should be only enough to cover the administrative costs, and not as a supplement to the overall cost of false alarms. Those who properly install and maintain their security systems and produce no false alarms should not have to pay for false alarms caused by those who don't. If we can do a background check and issue a permit to purchase a handgun for five dollars, I would think we could register a security alarm for a similar fee. If we need more money to cover the costs involved with false alarms, we should raise the fines associated with them.

Tom Casady said...

Steve,

We had to create a registration system, in order to know who to bill for excess false alarms. We also had to create an appeal process, computer processes, and devote some significant staff time to managing the system. The registration fee is intended to handle these expenses.

Steve said...

As long as the registration fee isn't a way of making up for lower fines on false alarms, I'm fine with it. I didn't mean to post twice on this issue. I thought I had posted once, but it didn't show up when I expected it to, so I thought I was simply losing my mind. :)

Anonymous said...

We should just increase the cost of the fine and make it a true "user" based fee. I know the start up for registration has a cost, but over time the fines will cover that cost and probably make money. Just another way to make up for taxes that are not being adjusted for the increase in services.
This fee may discourage residents from registering the alarm which may be needed in an emergency.