Law Proposed to Crack Down on False Alarm Calls

Los Angeles police would not respond to automated burglar alarms until the alarm company or the building occupants verified that the building had been broken into, under a law Councilman Marvin Braude proposed Monday to crack down on false alarm calls that divert police from real crime.

About 95% of the 161,000 security alarms that Los Angeles police responded to last year turned out to be false, triggered by human error, faulty equipment or bad weather, according to police and city officials. The needless responses cost about $6 million to $8 million in wasted work-hours, police officials have said.

The law, which was approved Monday by the council’s Public Safety Committee, was criticized by an alarm industry representative, who said the verification requirement would substantially increase the cost of alarm systems, putting them out of reach for many business and home owners.

Les Gold, an attorney representing the California Alarm Assn. and the Los Angeles Burglar and Fire Alarm Assn., said the city should at least phase in the requirement gradually.

“The preponderance of the companies do not have the ability to do it,” he said in an interview after the committee meeting.

Braude’s proposal, which will be considered by the entire council within the next two weeks, would also make it a more serious crime for alarm system users to fail to register the system with police. The law would increase the offense from an infraction, punishable by a fine of no more than $50 on a first offense, to a misdemeanor, punishable by a year in jail and a fine up to $1,000.

The proposal is the latest effort by city officials to reduce the thousands of false alarm calls that police must respond to annually.

In March, Councilwoman Laura Chick and Police Commissioner Art Mattox introduced a proposed law that would impose an $80 fine on owners of alarm systems after the third false call within a 12-month period. Currently, the $80 fine starts after the fourth false alarm.

That law would also crack down on alarm systems that are not registered with police by establishing an $80 fine for each false alarm by non-registered systems. The annual registration fee is $30.

That proposal is still awaiting a hearing by the full council.

According to Assistant City Atty. Byron Boeckman, the alarms could be verified in one of three ways: by an armed patrol unit working for the alarm company; by an employee of the business or owner of the home using the system; or by alarm company employees watching the property on video monitors.

Once it was verified that the alarm was genuine, police would respond to the call, he said.

The Braude law would also require alarm companies to show police a list of their customers so police can easily contact the companies when an alarm is triggered, Boeckman said. Such lists would also help the city identify which alarm system owners had not paid the city’s $30 permit fee.

About 100,000 security systems are registered in the city of Los Angeles, but city officials and alarm company representatives estimate there are another 200,000 unregistered systems, costing the city $6 million annually.

Gold said the alarm industry does not oppose the verification element of the law but asks that the city slowly phase it in so alarm companies can have time to meet the requirement.

“Obviously, if the city does not have the police to respond to the calls, someone should do it,” he said.

Gold also criticized the idea of making it a misdemeanor to fail to register an alarm system, saying the penalty is too harsh.

The alarm industry is fighting back at attempts to crack down on false alarms by backing proposed state legislation that would limit the penalties local municipalities can impose on alarm system owners.

Gold said the industry backs the state legislation because municipalities are imposing steep penalties that would make it too expensive for most people to own an alarm system.