sr-031180-8cCA RLK:LBC:dd ~~
Council Meeting 03-25-80 Santa Monica, California
~$ ~ f i~p~
STAFF REPORT
~~ 4 -° p~--"~
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: City Attorney
SUBJECT: Proposed ordinance regulating alarm systems and
charging service fees for false alarms. It also
places restrictions on automatic dialing devices
and ringer alarms.
INTRODUCTION
This report transmits for first reading a proposed
security alarm ordinance. The ordinance was requested by
Council at the June 20, 1979, meeting.
BACKGROUND
False burglary alarms are costing the City of Santa
Monica approximately $23,000.00 per month. Each year the
problem gets worse and more costly. In 1976, 3092 false alarms
were turned in. In 1978 this figure had climbed to
4239 false alarms. This is a waste of Citv funds and a
drain on police time and morale. This problem can be sub-
stantially alleviated by enactment of an ordinance requiring
a license fee and providing for police department response
service charges to false alarms.
Two additional problems in this area are: (1) external
ringer alarms which create neighborhood disturbances when
left ringing for an extended ne.r.nd anti (2) automatic dialing
devices which can'-£ie up'the police tel`et~hone lines making
the police department inaccessible to the public. The
proposed ordinance would regulate these two alarm features.
O~
The ordinance is based on the one used by Beverly
Hills and incorporates-several features proposed. by Council-
member Scott at the June 20 meeting. Beverly Hills has
reduced its false alarm rate by fifty percent (500) since
adopting its security alarm ordinance.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Do not enact an alarm ordinance.
2. Enact an ordinance similar to the City of Los Angeles,
whereby no fees are involved and compliance is sought through
mediation. Prior to enactment of this ordinance, ninety-
eight percent (98%) of Los Angeles alarms were false. Subsequent
to enactment, ninety-five percent (95%) were false.
3. Enact an ordinance similar to the Beverly Hills
ordinance which includes service charges for false alarms and
a permit system.
4. Enact a modified version of the Beverly Hills
ordinance, which establishes a graduated fee schedule of
service charges for non-legitimate calls for service, but
does not require subscribers of alarm companies to obtain
a permit from the City, as required by the Beverly Hills
ordinance.
RECOMMENDATION
Since false alarms are a serious and costly problem, and
it does not appear that the Los Angeles .ordinance has been
particularly effective, it is respectfully recommended that
the City Council accept the attached ordinance enacting a
modified version of the Beverly Hills ordinance for a first
reading, and hold a public hearing thereon.
Prepared by; Richard L. Knickerbocker
Lyn Beckett Cacciatore
-2-