Stiffer Penalties OKd for Faulty Alarms : Security: Council approves fines for owners of home systems that frequently trigger false calls.

Hoping to reduce the number of false alarms that police must answer, the Los Angeles City Council voted Wednesday to impose tougher penalties on the owners of security systems that generate false calls.

Although the measure was endorsed by police, it prompted an acrimonious, hourlong debate that ended with a 9-to-5 vote. Several council members endorsed the measure only after its backers agreed at the last minute to adopt the new penalties on a one-year trial basis.

Because the vote failed to get a 12-vote majority, it will require a second vote next week before it becomes law. However, police officials said they were not sure when they could begin to impose the new penalties.

Currently, owners of security alarm systems that generate more than four false alarms in a 12-month period face an $80 fine. The new law imposes the fine after the second false call.

In addition, owners of security alarms that are not registered with the Police Department can be charged with a misdemeanor, punishable by a fine of up to $1,000 or one year in jail, after the first false alarm. The current law only imposes a fine of $80 for owners who fail to register their systems.

Police Chief Willie L. Williams and the Police Commission have supported the tougher fines because they say they will reduce the number of false alarm calls and free up police to respond to real crime problems.

Opponents and supporters of the measure agree that false alarm calls are a drain on police resources. Nearly 95% of all alarm calls turn out to be false, triggered either by human error, faulty systems or weather conditions, police say.

Last year, the police responded to 147,000 false alarm calls, which accounted for 18% of all calls answered by police, according to officials.

“We catch burglars every day, but we would catch more if we didn’t have so many false alarms,” Police Lt. Charles Beck told the council. He added that if all the false alarm calls were eliminated, police would have up to 50 additional officers on the street at any moment.

But opponents of the new law say the tougher fines will only punish the owners of security alarm systems for false alarms that may have been caused by a faulty system. They argued that the measure would prompt residents and business owners to get rid of their alarm system.

“The way we are setting up this ordinance will only discourage alarm owners,” said Councilman Mike Hernandez.

Representatives of the alarm industry echoed those concerns and accused police and supporters of steamrolling the proposal through without adequately studying the measure.

“Most of them don’t know what they are talking about,” said Jeff Linder, a representative of the Los Angeles Burglar and Fire Alarm Assn.

Opponents of the measure suggested that the fines instead be levied against the security alarm companies who sell and install the systems that generate the false alarm calls. But they were told by the city attorney’s office that state law prevents the city from imposing fines on the firms.

Councilwoman Laura Chick, who championed the measure at the behest of police, said she would prefer to levy the fines on the alarm companies but she said the measure was the next-best solution.

“This makes sense,” she said. “Let’s move forward.”

Councilman Marvin Braude, another supporter of the measure, said the fines will force residents and merchants who have security systems to pressure alarm firms to create systems that generate fewer false alarm calls.