Police Want Compensation For False Alarms Proposal For Public Safety Committee Would Fine Touchy Security Systems

Spokane police are alarmed.

Nearly all of the burglary calls they rush to - an average of 18 a day - are bogus.

Blaring security systems rarely lead officers to a burglar, they say. Hardly ever do they discover signs of a break-in, like broken glass or kicked-in doors.

Usually, the only thing police do find are puzzled business owners scratching their heads at a frustrating alarm system that keeps going off.

Police are tired of this game. They want to start charging owners of faulty alarms for tying up police time.

“This is quite a problem for us,” said assistant police chief Dave Peffer. “We think fines will finally get people’s attention.”

Peffer is pushing City Council members to pass an alarm ordinance this fall similar to one that’s been in place in the county since 1989.

The proposal would result in escalating fines for each false alarm, as well as the right for police to disregard alarms at the homes and businesses of chronic offenders.

Besides generating revenue - the county has raked in nearly $30,000 in alarm fines so far this year - the ordinance would reduce the number of false calls and free up officers for other things, Peffer said.

“We have people who have perpetual false alarms and are not interested in fixing the problem,” he said. “It costs a lot to taxpayers when we have to respond all the time on these. It’s an amazing expense.”

Last year, the city logged 6,600 burglary alarm calls at homes and businesses. Of those, 6,350 were confirmed false. Had the proposed ordinance been in effect, fines for those offenders would have totaled more than $158,750.

In the county last year, 2,491 of the approximately 2,700 alarm calls were false.

“The ordinance has definitely brought our alarm calls down,” said Lt. Doug Silver. “The threat of not having us respond at all to alarms is more effective than the fines, I think.”

Virtually every police and sheriff’s department on the West Side charges fines for false alarm calls, said Seattle Police Detective Jerry Germeau, who also is a member of a national alarm ordinance task force.

“Quite frankly, I’m shocked Spokane doesn’t have a working (ordinance) in place,” Germeau said. “I bet residents there complain about slow police response and wonder why some officers have to take reports over the phone, too.”

Both Seattle and Tacoma, a city similar in size to Spokane, have alarm ordinances that are much less tolerant of offenders than Peffer’s proposal would be.

For example, neither department cares what the cause of the false alarm is - if there wasn’t a crime being committed when the alarm went off, someone’s going to pay.

That means windy weather, an unchained dog or a forgetful house-sitter all equal a fine if the alarm is activated.

Instead of an escalating fine schedule, Seattle and Tacoma have set fees: $50 a pop, including the very first offense. In Spokane County, the first two offenses are free. The city’s proposal would allow one offense to go uncharged.

After a sixth offense in Seattle, police do not have to respond to any more alarms at the owner’s house or business. The same is being proposed in Spokane. Sheriff’s deputies also can ignore alarms at chronic false alarm locations, but said they rarely ever do.

Germeau said tougher ordinances work because they’re straight-forward and easily enforced.

“You can’t dicker around with time frames for offenses and sliding fines and all that,” he said. “You have to show people that their quality of police service is suffering because of false alarms and fix it.”

That’s what Spokane police hope to do next month, when the alarm ordinance proposal is presented to the Public Safety Committee for review.

If approved by that three-member committee, the ordinance will go for a vote before the full City Council.

Councilman Joel Crosby predicts Spokane will have an alarm ordinance in place by the first of the year. He doesn’t expect resistance from the business community.

“It’s just time for us to do this, to get these calls down,” he said. “Business owners want quality of law enforcement just as much as anybody else does, so they should understand.”

Fellow committee member Bev Numbers said she supports the ordinance because it will improve public safety.

When almost all of the alarm calls they respond to are false, officers begin to downplay their importance, she said.

“They start not taking an alarm call so seriously, thinking, ‘Well, it’s just going to be another false alarm,”’ Numbers said. “That’s the time it could be something really critical. I don’t want to see that happen.”

, DataTimes ILLUSTRATION: Graphic: False alarm costs