Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />NOVEMBER 22, 1989 <br />Scalze pointed out that it isn't until after four false <br />alarms that the City's fee jumps to $250. <br />Stafford stated his recommendation is the user permit <br />plus service ticket method. <br />Fahey pointed out that this puts additional <br />administrative burden on the City Staff. Fahey pointed <br />out that it is only after four false alarms that the <br />fee increases significantly. <br />Stafford agreed that at some point the fees must <br />increase to make an impact. However, pointed out that <br />business burglar alarm systems are more complex. <br />Stafford suggested that the highest fees not occur <br />until after 8 to 12 false alarms. <br />Frank Frattalone reported that he has a burglar alarm <br />at his business, and the increase in the City's alarm <br />fees has made him more aware and more careful of how <br />the system is handled. Frattalone reported that this <br />issue has been discussed with his staff. However, <br />Frattalone felt that the $500 fee was too high. <br />Blesener reported that in 1990 police protection will <br />cost the City $360,000. One third of that cost, or <br />$120,000, is based on the number of incidents in the <br />City. Blesener reported that the City averages between <br />4,500 and 5,000 calls per year, which calculates to <br />approximately $24.00 per call. <br />Blesener stated that the main emphasis for increasing <br />the false alarm fees was to decrease the number of <br />false fire alarms. Blesener stated that he was willing <br />to take another look at the ordinance, and suggested <br />that perhaps the false alarm fees for burglar and fire <br />alarms should be separate and a more reasonable figure <br />set for burglar alarms. Blesener suggested that the <br />City find out what other cities are charging for false <br />alarms, and suggested that a moratorium be placed on <br />the $500 fee until the matter can be restudied. <br />Scalze agreed. <br />Fahey suggested that the issue be tabled for 30 days to <br />give the new City Administrator an opportunity to study <br />the matter and make a recommendation. <br />Mr. Fahey introduced the following resolution and moved <br />its adoption: <br />Page 10 <br />