Security Industry News >> EMERgency24 Inc.

Pleasant Hill, CA, Councilman Balks at Alarm Registration Fee

Chuck Escover is a former police officer, so he understands that responding to false burglar alarms wastes departments' resources. 

So Escover, also a former Pleasant Hill, CA, councilman, supports the city's 2007 decision to fine residents $100 for each false alarm after the first one in a calendar year. What he does not understand is why the city is charging every residential and commercial burglar alarm user in the city an annual $27 registration fee. 

"Basically, we call it a penalty for having an alarm," Escover said. "If the alarm company has contact information, it's redundant for the city to have it, too."

Police Chief Peter Dunbar said that the city's burglar alarm registration is akin to the state's requirement that motorists register their vehicles every year, at a cost.

"There may not be new information, there may be new information, but you're still paying a fee," he said. "We really don't know until we get these (registrations) back from people."

About 1,165 alarms are registered in Pleasant Hill, he said. 

Dunbar said that the fee covers the cost of processing the registration forms, which include the location of the alarm, name of the customer, phone numbers for those who police should call if the alarm goes off, and the name of the alarm company.

"I just don't see a need to change because it seems to be working the way it is," Dunbar added.

Pleasant Hill adopted the alarm ordinance to reduce the 97 percent false alarm rate, which was costing the city an estimated $300,000 a year in officer time and administrative costs. From March to December, Pleasant Hill fined seven residents and 50 businesses for false alarms, Dunbar said. 

Several Contra Costa County cities, including Walnut Creek, Martinez and Richmond, also levy fines for false alarms. A few charge for a permit for a new alarm. However, Pleasant Hill appears to be the only city in the county to impose an annual registration fee. 

Mayor Karen Mitchoff, who was not a council member when the alarm ordinance was passed, thinks the fee is fair. The city is recouping the cost of maintaining its records, she said, not turning a profit.

"If this was a large amount of money that would be one thing, but $27 every year to make sure we have the most updated information I don't think is unreasonable," Mitchoff said. 

Escover, who wants the council to reconsider the fee, suggested charging only those burglar alarm users who need to update their contact information or fining residents with incorrect information on file with the city after police respond to an alarm. 

"It is a lot of money when you think about your property taxes are going to go up, and the (Pleasant Hill) Recreation and Park District was successful with their bond, so that's going to add money to your property tax bill," he said. "Every little bit hurts when you add it up."