LA Fire Alarms article
Letter from George P. Gunning re: Fire Alarms
Corona Police Department Alarm Management:
1. Alarm Company request letter from Corona PD
2. Sample User List from Corona PD
Confidentiality of Customer Lists
Privacy of Customer List 2004 (Brief version)
Free Alarm User Awareness class at City of Irvine PD - Preventing false alarms
City of Fontanta New Alarm Ordinance:
http://www.fontana.org/police/verified_response/Alarm%20_Ordinance.pdf
CITY OF FONTANA
NEW ORDINANCE, COMPANY PERMIT AND FINES
If you have any questions regarding permits or the Verified Response policy,
please contact Deputy Chief Alan Hostetter at ahostetter@fontana.org or call
(909) 350-7705. Chief Rodney Jones can be reached at (909) 350-7740. For
information visit www.fontana.org Attached is the ordinance for you
reference.
FONTANA ALARM RESPONSE
Effective October 9, 2008 Fontana Police Department WILL NOT respond to
calls for service to alarm activations unless the event is verified pursuant
to their ordinance. In addition, the alarm company will be fined $150.
Verified alarms that receive police response that are determined to be false
by the police department will result in a $200 fine to the alarm company.
Robbery, panic and hold-up alarms that are determined to be false will
result in a $200 fine to the alarm company.
FONTANA ALARM BUSINESS PERMIT
The City of Fontana has a new ordinance requiring that companies doing
business in the city complete an Alarm Business Permit. This should be
complete by November 9, 2008.
Following are instructions to alarm companies from our legal counsel:
Please notify all IEAA (CAA) members that in preparing their Fontana Alarm
Business Permit Applications they should provide only the following
information:
- Legal Business Name
- Doing Business as
- Business Address
- Business Mailing Address (if different than business address)
- Business Telephone Number
- Business Fax Number
- Signature of Business Owner/Proprietor.
They should specifically delete that portion of the Application in which
they purport to agree to all terms and conditions set forth in the Fontana
City Code regulating Alarms, and they should initial the deletion.
LEGAL CONCERNS OF NEW ORDINANCE
Also, for your information, below is a brief summary of the potential
challenges to the Fontana ordinance. This is provided for your information
on no action is being taken at this time.
Stated succinctly, and in no particular order, here are the claims that
might be advanced in a lawsuit challenging the new Fontana Burglar Alarm
Ordinance ("Ordinance"). We have prepared a separate memorandum which
examines these claims at greater length.
1) Unlawful New Tax. The Ordinance imposes new taxes, disguised as
"fines," without the constitutionally required vote of the electorate.
2) Alarm Company Act. The Ordinance violates the Alarm Company Act, by
imposing two alarm company permit fees, and by requiring the submission of
onerous applications.
3) Government Code Section 845. The Ordinance violates Govt. Code §
845, which does not even allow the police to refuse to respond to a report
of an activated alarm on the innocuous ground that the alarm owner has
failed to pay a small permit fee.
4) Equal Protection. The Ordinance violates equal protection,
discriminating against poorer persons who cannot afford audio or visual
monitoring equipment, and by treating similarly situated persons
differently.
5) Substantive Due Process. The Ordinance violates substantive due
process, through its illogical, arbitrary and capricious definition of what
constitutes a "verified" alarm, and by imposing a $200 "fine" on an alarm
monitoring company that has lawfully reported an actually verified alarm if
the police later find no evidence of criminal activity.
6) Brown Act. The pertinent City Council Agenda did not comply with
the Brown Act, which requires a meaningful description of the matter to be
discussed at the City Council meeting to which it pertains.
7) Taking of Property without Just Compensation. The Ordinance results
in the unconstitutional taking or damaging of property without just
compensation; the Ordinance effectively renders valueless the burglar alarm
systems installed by homes and businesses, in many cases in reliance on
police department advice.
8) Commerce Clause. The Ordinance imposes a significant burden on
interstate commerce not justified by the purported benefits of the
Ordinance.
JERRY LENANDER
Executive Director
California Alarm Association
800/437-7658