Arrow-right Camera
The Spokesman-Review Newspaper
Spokane, Washington  Est. May 19, 1883

Rash Of False Alarms Needs To Be Silenced

Car alarms bleep, scream, bellow everywhere now in Spokane. When was the last time you really paid attention? Perhaps you thought: “Oh, it’s just the wind or some kids fooling around the car - no big deal.”

So who would blame Spokane police if they began to feel the same nonchalant way about alarms that sound off in businesses and homes? Last year, the city logged 6,600 burglary alarm calls, but only 250 of those alarms signaled a real problem at a home or business. The rest were false.

Police officers responded, though. Each call took an average of 29 minutes, and at least two officers were sent out. Thousands of hours of valuable police time were wasted on those false alarms, hours that could have been spent doing more important work, such as investigating real burglaries, robberies and assaults. Or police could have used the time to walk and drive their beats, getting to know the people in the neighborhoods they protect.

That’s the reason we applaud a proposed ordinance up for review by the Public Safety Committee. The ordinance would fine owners of faulty alarms. Spokane County already does that; fines have brought in nearly $30,000 this year. And the practice is common in nearly every police and sheriff’s department on Washington’s West Side.

The ordinance places responsibility on the individuals who own the alarm systems. And that’s where the responsibility should be. It will remind owners to keep their systems efficient. And it will encourage them to take the time to teach their employees and family members the proper way to set and deactivate the alarms.

The city proposal isn’t a pocketbook breaker either. The first false alarm would be forgiven. The second would net a $25 fine; the third would cost $50; the fourth, $75. Five calls and things would get tougher. The fine would be $100, and police no longer would respond to the alarms. Five false alarms should give anyone enough time - and incentive - to figure out what’s wrong with a hyperactive alarm system.

Another plus: The fines would put some much-needed money into city coffers; if the ordinance had been in effect this year, the city would be more than $158,000 richer.

The biggest advantage? Fewer false alarms would mean all alarms will be taken more seriously. The goal of any security system is to protect lives and property. By cutting down the number of false alarms, this mission will be accomplished.

, DataTimes The following fields overflowed: CREDIT = Rebecca Nappi/For the editorial board