Burglar alarms cry wolf -- police cry foul

High-tech home and business security systems may be a burglar's worst nightmare, but the ear-splitting devices have also become a million-dollar-a-year headache for the Seattle Police Department.

On a typical day, officers fan out across the city, responding to 81 burglary alarms. And each day, 98 percent of those calls turn out to be bogus, triggered by accident or operator error.

False alarms are such a budget-draining problem that police officials now favor adopting a wait-and-see strategy that's bound to cause a stir.

It's called "verified response," and it's dreaded by the alarm industry and scorned by many homeowners.

Under that plan, officers wouldn't respond to an alarm until someone else -- a resident, neighbor or security guard -- first verifies it's valid, then calls 911. Police would continue to automatically respond only to silent panic or duress alarms triggered by users.

If the proposal is adopted, Seattle would become the first city in Washington to take such drastic action.

"We're totally against it," said Howard Richardson, president of the Washington Burglar and Fire Alarm Association. "If burglars know that the Police Department is not going to respond, it's open book for them to do their thing."

Although verified response is their top choice, Seattle police officials say they haven't ruled out other options, including fining alarm companies as well as users for false alarms.

"Verified response has a lot of benefits," said police Chief Gil Kerlikowske, whose department loses more than 13,600 hours of officer time each year to false alarms. Including wasted dispatch services, the total cost to the city is $1.28 million.

"I'm not going to lock myself into choosing one option right now, but it definitely has worked in other cities," Kerlikowske said.

Salt Lake City adopted the approach last December after determining that 12 percent of the city's patrol officers were tied up every day dealing with false alarms. Ninety percent of those bogus calls have now been eliminated, said Shanna Werner, a police administrator.

"Since enacting the new law, we've saved $500,000 a year and put five more police officers back on the street," she said.

But some critics say verified response unfairly punishes all alarm users.

Eighty percent of false alarms are caused by 20 percent of users who don't know how to operate the devices, said John Wurner, a consultant with the Comprehensive Alarm Reduction Effort, a collaborative effort of the alarm industry and law enforcement.

"You don't punish everyone who drives a Ford, you punish those who speed in a Ford," said Wurner, a former Olympia police chief.

Some users fear they could be in serious trouble the one time their alarm sounds -- and it's a real break-in.

"The problem I see with it is that it could put someone in a dangerous position," said Rob Olsen, whose family has had a burglar-alarm system at their Madison Park home for about eight years. "You really never know whether it's going to be false or not."

Seattle police Detective Dale Garnica, the department's alarm administrator, told the City Council's Public Safety Committee last week that ownership of an alarm system is really a "private civil contract" between the alarm owner and security company. The Police Department is not legally compelled to respond to such alarms, but voluntarily does so.

"It's a huge burden to the department, and a change is warranted," said Garnica, adding that verified response is "the most common-sense approach."

Under the city's existing ordinance, adopted in September 1993, security system owners can be fined $50 for each false alarm. After a sixth violation, police no longer respond and can order that the alarm be disconnected.

(Note: When originally published, this article misstated the amount of the city's fine.)

The proposal is still early in the approval process, and police officials are expected to present a more detailed plan to council members this fall.

"Should we decide to go this route," Councilwoman Jan Drago said, "we're going to hear it from the public, because they take it for granted this is a service we provide."

City officials in Tacoma heard an earful this summer when they considered adopting a verified-response policy. After a hearing in July, the City Council tabled the measure for further study.

Some city officials -- several of whom own home-security systems -- questioned whether public safety would be compromised.

"The big issue was that people were against discontinuing a service that police had been providing for years," Tacoma police Capt. Mark Langford said. "They were afraid that there would be no response if there was a crime in progress."

The Tacoma council also wanted more review of whether enough private security firms were available to pick up the slack. And, if security companies were forced to hire the firms in order to verify alarms, the council wanted to know what the added cost would be to consumers.

In Salt Lake City, Werner said the new policy has resulted in an average $5-a-month increase in private security charges. As for response time, she said homeowners and merchants needn't worry: A private security guard's average response time is six to 15 minutes, while it took police about 40 minutes to make the low-priority checks.

But Richardson said that isn't what people want.

"A security guard is a guy with a gun who doesn't have any real police training," he said. "People won't feel safe with that."

Wurner, the alarm consultant, recounted the story of a Tacoma woman who told city officials that her alarm has been activated only once -- when someone recently tried breaking into her home. She hid under her bed and waited until police responded, scaring off the would-be burglar.

"Had a security guard responded, they probably wouldn't have come inside the home, and they're not really trained to handle those situations," Wurner said.

State and national trade groups urge cities to deal with the false-alarm problem through a combination of fines, cutting off chronic offenders and teaching users how to properly manage their systems.

The Bellevue Police Department was one of the first in the nation to adopt that model, in 1993.

"We initially saw a huge decrease," said Officer Dan Mathieu, "but it hasn't held up."

Like Seattle, Bellevue is now looking into ways to beef up the city's ordinance, including boosting fines.

"We haven't considered non-response yet," Mathieu said. "We'd really like to continue providing our residents this service. But I can understand why other cities are going to it. I mean, the costs that false alarms pose to police departments are just ridiculous."

Since having an alarm installed in her Capitol Hill home 16 years ago, Ann Matheson said it's been activated by her dog, her housecleaner and neighbors "who felt so guilty about it, they paid the fine for me."

She thinks the verified-response proposal is reasonable, since it frees up officers to respond to more urgent matters.

Besides, she said, it sometimes took cops about a half-hour to respond to her false alarms.

"If it's a legitimate alarm and it takes that long to respond," she said, "someone would've already smashed into the house and taken everything anyway."

FALSE ALARMS

Police departments across the United States are responding to the false-alarm problem in different ways:

Miami: Alarm operators must get a permit. They are allowed five "free" false alarms per year. After that, $25 fines are levied. The permit is revoked after a ninth offense. Impact: Number of repeat offenders has dropped, but overall false alarms remain high.

Phoenix: Police warn operators after a second false alarm in a year. Further violations can result in fines ranging from $55 to $200. Impact: Thirty percent drop in false alarms.

Philadelphia: Police issue $25 fines after a fourth false alarm in a year. Operators are licensed. A seventh violation results in a $100 fine and license revocation. Impact: Heavy enforcement has led to steady decline of false alarms.

Portland: Private operators must get a permit and are fined $50 after their second and third offense. Any further false alarms result in a $100 citation. Impact: Police officials say the policy has been "highly effective" (numbers not available).

Salt Lake City: Police generally don't respond to alarms unless a security company employee, guard or third party notifies them that it's valid. Impact: Ninety percent drop in false alarms.

Sources: The International Association of Chiefs of Police; Salt Lake City Police Department.

FALSE ALARMS

Households with security alarms: 17.5 percent

Businesses: 14.3 percent

Alarms police responded to last year: 29,612

Number proven to be false: 28,757

Officer time spent responding to alarms: 13,622 hours

Average per alarm: 26.7 minutes

Cost to department: $1,280,852

Recovered in false-alarm fines: $277,562*

Total 2000 deficit: $1,003,290

*Amount recovered by department.

Source: Seattle Police Department

In other cities

Police departments across the United States are responding to the false-alarm problem in different ways:

Miami

Alarm operators must get a permit. They are allowed five "free" false alarms per year. After that, $25 fines are levied. The permit is revoked after a ninth offense.

Impact: Number of repeat offenders has dropped, but overall false alarms remain high.

Phoenix

Police warn operators after a second false alarm in a year. Further violations can result in fines ranging from $55 to $200.

Impact: Thirty percent drop in false alarms.

Philadelphia

Police issue $25 fines after a fourth false alarm in a year. Operators are licensed. A seventh violation results in a $100 fine and license revocation.

Impact: Heavy enforcement has led to steady decline of false alarms.

Portland

Private operators must get a permit and are fined $50 after their second and third offense. Any further false alarms result in a $100 citation.

Impact: Police officials say the policy has been "highly effective" (numbers not available).

Salt Lake City

Police generally don't respond to alarms unless a security company employee, guard or third party notifies them that it's valid.

Impact: Ninety percent drop in false alarms.

Sources: The International Association of Chiefs of Police; Salt Lake City Police Department.

P-I reporter Lewis Kamb can be reached at 206-615-1246 or lewiskamb@seattlepi.com

Add P-I Local headlines to