posted on Thursday, March 20, 2008 9:19 AM
by
klehan
Casa Grande, AZ, Plans to Increase Fines for False Burglar Alarms.
In
Arizona, Casa Grande's City Council approved the initial reading of a proposed
alarm ordinance to update and strengthen the previous version that was written
in 1994.
The ordinance must be on a City Council agenda a second time before it goes into effect
on June 1.
"It's taken some time, obviously, to do that due to some changes in staff, and now with
the new council wanting to take an additional look at it," City Attorney Brett Wallace
said.
"This ordinance, in an effort to continue to curb false alarms, augments and replaces the
existing alarm ordinance that we have."
Wallace said the ordinance makes major changes in four areas.
"It would require registration by alarm users, which would be by permit and payment of an
annual fee," he said. "The initial fee, which would be set in our consolidated fees
schedule, is being suggested at $10."
Wallace said the ordinance, which would be handled through the Police Department, would
include schools, which are now exempt. The Police Department earlier said that the 346
false alarms at schools, mostly at off hours and caused by janitorial and other
personnel, equaled 12.7 percent of the false alarm total during 2007.
"There are heightened penalties for repeat violators, those who continue to have a number
of false alarms," Wallace said.
Those fines would be $50 for the third through fifth false alarm. The fee for the third
one may be waived if the user attends alarm school. The fine for the sixth through eighth
false alarms is $100 and for the ninth or more, it is $150. At the 10th false alarm,
revocation of the alarm may be sought.
Proposed penalties for false panic alarms within a permit year are $125 for the second
through fourth and $225 for five or more. Revocation may be sought after the sixth false
alarm.
The fines for false panic alarms are higher because police treat panic alarms as holdup
alarms, sending out more personnel.
There would be a fine of $50 for failure to provide a responsible party on scene or for
no response to an alarm. During 2007, the Police Department said, there were 757 cases of
persons not responding.
"And it also involved the regulation of the alarm businesses, which is something that our
current ordinance does not do," Wallace said.
The present ordinance does not require any registration of alarms. The Police Department
said some alarm companies provide information about owners, but others do not. By the
same token, many residents do not tell the department that they have an alarm.
Under the new ordinance alarm companies must provide customers with instructions on
operating alarms and avoiding false alarms and must notify the Police Department of who
has an alarm so that police know who to call in an emergency. Owners must also make sure
that the department has the name of the owner and at least two representatives who could
respond if the owner is not available.
Owners or a representative must respond within 30 minutes of an alarm activation or when
requested to by police officers.
The $10 permit, which will be billed yearly thereafter by the city Finance Department,
must be obtained within 10 days of installation of an alarm. The ordinance says persons
or businesses having an alarm installed prior to April 1 must obtain the permit by May
31.
"The proposed effective date of this would be June 1, to allow some additional time after
the ordinary effective date in order to get the word out to the citizens about it and let
everyone know when the registration would be required, because it does require
registration of our existing users," Wallace said.
The city has not yet released details on where and how to apply for the alarm permits,
but City Manager Jim Thompson said the public information officer would be working with
the Police Department on announcements.
The council vote was unanimous, with Mary Kortsen saying, "Even though I have a little
reservation about including the schools, I vote yes."