Burglaries: Ordinance Aims to Reduce False Alarms

A home burglar alarm goes off and an officer flips on her strobe lights and steers her police cruiser toward the residential neighborhood. Across town, a second officer is radioed for back up and leaves his post.

Once they get to the house, a homeowner says her alarm had malfunctioned and apologizes to the two officers, but time had already been wasted responding to the false alarm.

To make matters worse, Chief John Salvatore said, depending on the shift, a lone officer is often left to cover the entire town when others respond to an alarm.

"The resources are being constrained," he said during an interview in his office. "The economy has put constraints on us to do more with less. The demands of the job have increased."

The number of false alarms has been on the rise, and repeat offenders place a particular strain on the police department. Especially because the nature of the calls require police back up for the officers' own protection.

As the town's population has grown, Salvatore said his staff has not kept pace.

"We have a limited amount of officers," he said. "The basic patrol force hasn't changed. For 12 years or more, we haven't expanded."

In fact, the last two officers the department has added were school resource officers, according to Salvatore.

Years ago, the Town Council had considered cracking down on false alarms by fining repeat offenders who fail or refuse to fix their security systems.

Salvatore opposed the measure, but has since changed his stance on the issue.

The chief supports a new, statewide initiative for towns and cities to pass an ordinance to fine repeat offenders in an effort to cut down the number of false alarms.

Police departments have worked with alarm companies, and Salvatore said the resulting sample ordinance has been endorsed by the Connecticut Police Chiefs Association.

The Connecticut Alarm and Systems Integrators Association was also involved in the process, he said.

A long process

Town officials have expressed support for adopting a false alarm ordinance for Monroe.

"Obviously, we're not trying to overregulate," First Selectman Steve Vavrek said. "It's good for the Town Council to look at it. It's all about efficiency. We don't have the resources some other communities have, so we want to make it more efficient."

"Anything that helps our police department do its job better is obviously a good thing for the town," Town Councilman J.P. Sredzinski said Monday morning.

Sredzinski is chairman of the council's Legislative & Administrative Committee, which is charged with tailoring the sample alarm ordinance to Monroe's needs and presenting a version to the Town Council.

"No progress has really been made on the issue," Sredzinski said of the L&A meeting held last Thursday.

The councilman said he recently obtained an electronic copy of the ordinance model, which he said will be reviewed and brought up again in the committee's August meeting.

L&A will eventually present a final version of the false alarm ordinance to the full council for discussion, then there will be a public hearing and a vote, Sredzinski said.

"Passing an ordinance is a long process," he said, "and lots of things can change."

How it may work

Just one false alarm set off by a strong breeze, a squirrel or an electronic malfunction would not be enough to hit a home or business owner with a fine.

"It gives a number of false alarms warnings before a fine is imposed," Salvatore said of the sample ordinance.

Residents and businesses with alarms would have to register with the police department and provide information on their alarm company.

"This way, if there is a repeat offender, the alarm company can repair it," Salvatore said, "and if the person tries to ignore it, they will be fined."

An example of how the ordinance may work, according to Salvatore, is warnings would be issued for the first two false alarms, a $50 fine for the third, fourth and fifth; $75 fines for the sixth and seventh time, $100 for the eighth and ninth, and $250 for the tenth.

"Habitual offenders are few and far between," he said, "but there are repeat offenders."

Not a fundraiser

All money from fines would go into the town's general fund, but Salvatore said the intent of the proposed ordinance is not to produce revenue.

"This is not to support police programs," he said. "The intent of the police department is not for this to be a money making venture. It's to reduce the number of false calls that take up police resources."

Whenever an officer is pulled from an area to assist another officer in responding to an alarm, Salvatore said that officer is being taken away from a traffic detail or a community service activity.

"We don't discourage alarms. We just want them to be utilized in a more responsible manner," Salvatore said. "If you don't rectify an error in the system, eventually you will be held accountable."