HomeMy WebLinkAboutO-08996RFC/rr
9/26/77
ORDINANCE NO.
8996
AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED "BURGLARY AND ROBBERY
ALARM ORDINANCE"; PROVIDING DEFINITIONS;
REQUIRING ALARM USERS TO PARTIALLY COMPENSATE
THE CITY FOR UNNECESSARY RESPONSES BY THE POLICE
TO FALSE ALARMS, AND ALLOWING FOR AN APPEAL FROM
A DETERMINATION THAT AN ALARM WAS FALSE; PRO-
VIDING THE POLICE DEPARTMENT WITH THE AUTHORITY
TO SUSPEND ITS RESPONSE TO ALARM SYSTEMS THAT
ACTIVATE A CERTAIN NUMBER OF FALSE ALARMS,
THEREBY CREATING THE PRESUMPTION THAT THE ALARM
SYSTEM IS MALFUNCTIONING; PROHIBITING THE INSTAL-
LATION OR MAINTENANCE OF ALL AUTOMATIC TELEPHONE
ALARM DIALING DEVICES WHICH TRANSMIT OVER TELE-
PHONE LINES EXCLUSIVELY USED BY THE PUBLIC TO
REQUEST EMERGENCY SERVICE FROM THE MIAMI POLICE
DEPARTMENT; CONTAINING A REPEALER PROVISION
AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE.
WHEREAS, throughout the City of Miami there are approxi-
mately 8,000 burglary and robbery alarms with a wide range
of sensitivity and reliability installed in both commercial
and residential properties, all of which are unregulated;
and
WHEREAS, reliable systems act to prevent and detect crimes
and assist the Miami Police Department in the performance of
its duties; and
WHEREAS, unreliable systems hamper the police in the
performance of their duties and also create a public nuisance
injurious to the peace and well-being of the community and to
the safety of
WHEREAS,
19,000 alarms
the
individual police officers; and
the Miami Police Department responds to more than
per year, of which at least 98% are false alarms
in that, either by negligence, malfunction, or poor design, they
were activated by means other than the criminal activities, they
were designed to detect and report; and
WHEREAS, the Miami Police Department spends in excess of
10,000 employee hours per year investigating these false alarms,
thereby depriving the remainder of the community of these police
services and reducing the Police Department's abil•i,ty to promptly.
respond to genuine calls for services; and
WHEREAS, the burglar alarm industry has been unwilling
or unable to regulate itself to the extent that the number of
false alarms might be reduced and the reliability increased
thereby; and
WHEREAS, the purpose and intent of this ordinance is to
assist the alarm industry and alarm users in improving alarm
reliability by making effective and reliable systems more
attractive to users; and
WHEREAS, a secondary purpose of this ordinance is to
partly defray the costs involved in responding to malfunction-
ing false alarms;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA:
Section 1. This ordinance shall be known as the "Burglary
and Robbery Alarm Ordinance."
Section 2. For the purposes of this ordinance, the follow-
ing terms shall have the following meaning:
(a) "Alarm system" means any assembly of equipment,
mechanical or electrical, arranged to signal the occurrence of
an illegal entry or other activity requiring urgent attention
and to which the police department is expected to respond, but
does not include alarms installed in conveyances.
(b) "Alarm user" means the person, firm, partnership,
association, corporation, company or organization of any kind
in control of any building, structure or facility or portion
thereof wherein an alarm system is maintained.
(c) "Alarm business" means the business of any indi-
vidual, partnership, corporation, or other entity engaged in
selling, leasing, maintaining, servicing, repairing, altering,
replacing, moving or installing any alarm system or in causing
any alarm system to be sold, leased, maintained, serviced,
repaired, altered, replaced, moved or installed in or on any
building, structure or facility.
-2-
'' 8 9 9 6
(d) "Automatic telephone dialing alarm system"
means an automatic dialing device or an automatic telephone
dialing alarm system and shall include any system which, upon
being activated, automatically transmits by telephone or tele-
phone line to the Miami Police Department, a recorded message
or code signal indicating a need for emergency response; or
a system which, upon activation, connects to an answering
service whose function it is to transmit to the Miami Police
Department a need for emergency response.
(e) "False alarm" means an alarm signal eliciting
a response by police when a situation requiring a response by
the police does not in fact exist, but this definition does not
include an alarm signal caused by unusually violent conditions
of nature nor does it include other extraordinary circumstances
not reasonably subject to control by the alarm user.
(f) "Hearing officer" means an employee of the City
of Miami designated by the chief of police to act as an impartial
arbitrator at hearings related to the enforcement of the herein
ordinance.
Section 3. (a) Whenever an alarm is activated in the
city, thereby requiring an emergency response to the location
by the police department, and the police department does respond,
a police officer on the scene of the activated alarm system
shall inspect the area protected by the system and shall deter-
mine whether the emergency response was required as indicated
by the alarm system or whether in some way the alarm system
malfunctioned and thereby activated a false alarm.
(46) If the police officer at the scene of the acti-
vated alarm system determines the alarm to be false, said
officer shall make a report of the false alarm, a copy of
which shall be mailed or delivered to the alarm user at the
location of the said alarm system installation advising the
-3-
8 9 9 6 �1
alarm user of the false alarm along with a bill for services
rendered in the amount of $25, which shall constitute a debt
owed the City.
(c) The chief of police, or his designee, shall
have the right to inspect any alarm system on the premises
to which a response has been made and he may cause an inspec-
tion of such system to be made at any reasonable time there-
after to determine whether it is being used in conformity with
the terms of this ordinance.
Section 4.(a) When any alarm user has received 3 such
reports of false alarms, within a one year period of time,
the chief of police, or his designee, shall notify the alarm
user in writing that the police department will presume that
any future message, signal or alarm from any alarm system at
the location in question is a malfunction of the said system
and that the police department need not and will not respond
to any future signals or alarms from said system after 10 days
from the date of such notice.
(b) The chief of police shall reinstate police
response to the subject location after the suspension thereof
pursuant to Section 4(a) hereof upon receipt from the alarm
user of a certificate from a licensed and reasonably qualified
alarm business that (i) the user's alarm system has been inspec-
ted and has been serviced or replaced; and (ii) said system is
fully operational, with all deficiencies corrected to eliminate
false alarms.
Section 5. The Miami Police Department shall be under no
obligation to respond to any message, signal or alarm from any
alarm system after the 10 day period set forth in Section 4(a)
hereof has expired and the city shall not be responsible for
its failure to respond during any response suspension period.
Section 6. (a) A hearing officer shall be appointed by
the chief of police to hear appeals from alarm users on
-4-
8996
the issue of whether the alarm system in question activated
a false alarm, as determined by a police officer at the scene
of such activitated alarm.
(b) Upon receipt of any false alarm ,report from
the city, the alarm user shall have 10 days, orally or in
writing, to request a hearing before the said hearing officer.
(c) At the hearing, which must be scheduled and
concluded within 15 days from the date the request for same
is received, the alarm user shall have the right to present
evidence and testimony.
(d) The hearing officer shall make written findings
available to the alarm user and the chief of police within 10
days from the date the hearing is concluded.
(e)(i) A decision by the chief of police, or his
designee, to uphold or to cancel the false alarm report which
is the subject of the herein section must be made within 10 days
from the receipt of the above findings by the chief of police.
(ii) Until all of the steps set forth in this
section have been completed, the false alarm in question will
be considered to have been genuine and will not be considered
the basis for the prima facie presumption that the involved
alarm system is malfunctioning.
Section 7.(a) It shall be unlawful for any person, natural
or corporate, to sell, offer for sale, install, maintain, lease,
operate or assist in the operation of an automatic telephone
dialing alarm system over any telephone lines exclusiveli sed
by the public to request emergency service from the Miami
Police Department.
(b) The chief of police, or his designee, when he
has knowledge of the unlawful maintenace of an automatic tele-
phone dialing alarm system, installed or operated in violation
-5-
8996
of Section 7(a) hereof shall, in writing, order the owner,
operator or lessee to disconnect and cease operation of the
system within 72 hours of receipt of the order.
(c) Any automatic telephone dialing system installed,
as set forth in Section 7(a) hereof, even if installed prior to
the effective date of this ordinance, shall be removed within
30 days of the order as contained in Section 7(b) hereof.
(d) It shall be unlawful for any person, natural or
corporate, to fail to comply with any of the provisions of this
action.
Section 8. This ordinance shall be liberally construed in
accordance with the intent and purpose as set forth therein.
Section 9. All ordinances or parts of ordinances, insofar
as they are inconsistent or in conflict with the provisions of
this ordinance, are hereby repealed.
Section 10. If any section, part of section, paragraph,
clause, phrase, or word of this ordinance is declared invalid,
the remaining provisions of this ordinance shall not be affected.
PASSED ON FIRST READING BY TITLE ONLY this 27th day of
September , 1979.
PASSED AND ADOPTED ON SECOND AND FINAL READING BY TITLE
ONLY this 17th day of October , 1979.
ATTEST
Maurice A. Ferre
MAYOR
032'.
RALF' G. Q•NGIE, CITY CLERK
PREPARED AND APPROVED BY:
lec-44,e- gfa-tic_
ROBERT F. CLARK
ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS:
GEO E F. KNOX
C IT3 ATTORNEY
-6-
8996 •
TO;
FROM:
Joseph R. Grassie
City Manager
4114atcP //a
tAvi0
Kenneth I. Harms
Chief of Police
c TY . MIAM . : i_CJ„113A
INTER -Or , 1L:E +1`,1DUM
t1EF ilt! t
E N CLOSliHC5:
September 14, 1979 ':LE: LEG 9-2
Ordinance for Burglary
and Robbery Alarm
The attached ordiance, which I recommend, entitled "Burglary and
Robbery Alarm Ordinance" is a joint effort of the Police and Law
Departments. I have previously requested to have this item
tentatively included on the agenda for the City Commission meeting
on September 27th, 1979.
The Police Department has been studying ways to ameliorate the
growing false alarm problems since 1969. Only in the last few years,
however, has the magnitude of the problem reached crisis proportions.
These trends are being experienced on a nation-wide basis. Many
cities have adopted a wide range of control mechanism with varying
degrees of success. After evaluating the impact and cost effective-
ness of each, we have proposed an ordinance with the underlying
philosophy that it should be:
- fair to all parties
- not restrict reliable alarms
- simple to enforce and comprehend
- entail a minimum of business regulation
- protect the privacy and confidentiality of the alarm users
- place the responsibility on the alarm user rather than the.
alarm industry which will, in turn, force the alarm industry
to improve reliability
- that costs be repaid by those who disproportionately abuse
police resources
- constitutionally sound to withstand legal challenges
The monies generated by this ordinance would offset the costs of
administration and the cost of actual police response to the scene.
Hopefully, the net result will eventually lead to a reduction in
the number of false alarms by making unreliable alarms more costly
to operate than more reliable alarms.
Page 1 of 4
8996
c'
Joseph R. Grassie
Kenneth I. Harms
September 14, 1979
Burglary/Robbery Alarm Ordinance
PERTINENT DATA
1 - Existing alarm installations are estimated between 7,000 and
9,000 in the City. Approximately 95% to 97% of these alarms are
installed at places of business. The remainder are residential
installations„ Southern Bell marketing data lists the number of
business locations in the City as 28,620. 38,000 Occupational
Licenses are issued annually by the City.
For every one business with an alarm system, between two -and -a -half
and three business are without alarms. At current trends of
property crime growth, insurance permium growth, alarm industry
competition and growth, the number of alarms installed should
increase twenty to twenty-five percent yearly.
2 - 98% of all installed alarms are leased from alarm companies -
the remaining 2% are user -owners.
3 - 4% of received calls are audible while 57% are silent ('76).
4 - Casual factors in burglar alarm activation are: actual
offenses (1%); attempted offenses (1%); defective alarm (26.%);
employee error (22%); other (2%); unknown non -criminal origin
(48%).
5 - Owners did not respond to assist with investigation in 57%
of incidents. Alarm company representatives did not respond
to 68% of these incidents ('76).
6 - Alarm signals have gone from 3.87% of the total calls for
service in 1969 to 8% in 1978.
7 - Business burglaries (as opposed to residential) represent
- 37% of all burglaries.
8 - Business robberies (as opposed to street and residential
robberies) represent 9% of all robberies ('78).
9 - The median time on the scene of alarm calls has gone from
9 minutes in '76 to 12.7 minutes in '78. Sample data for '79
indicates times are now averaging 18.4 minutes with a standard
deviation of 31.3minutes.
10- In 1969, 39 addresses were responded to in excess of 15 times
per year. In 1977, 344 separate locations were responded to more
than 15 times each.
Page 2 of 4
8996
Joseph R. Grassie
Kenneth I. Harms
September 14, 1979
Burglary/Robbery Ordinance
11 - Burglary alarm signals have progressed as follows:
1969 - 4,247 alarms
1972 - 8,117 alarms
1975 - 12,564 a a.ms
1976 - 10,989 alarms
1977 - 19,325 alarms
1978 - 19,040 alarms
This represents a 348% increase since 1969.
12 - Actual burglaries and robberies have increased as follows:
YEAR ROBBERIES BURGLARIES
1969 2,749 7,094
1972 2,555 8,294
1975 2,657 13,224
1976 2,316 10,850
1977 2,421 10,037
1978 2,832 9,635
% increase since 1969 3% 36%
Page 3 of 4
8996
-21111111111111111111111111111111010.
Joseph R. Grassie
Septembe14, 1979
Kenneth I. Harms
COST ANALYSIS
Burglary/Robbery Alarm Ordiance
A - An average estimate of number of police personnel on the scene of
an alarm call is 2.7 (including one or more back-up units, with one
or two officers per vehicle).
B - Effective October 7, 1979, the median salary of patrol officers
will be $8.80 per hour (with three years of service). With fringe
benefits of 50%, the average hourly cost to the City is $13.20 per
hour per officer. Administrative overhead for uniforms, vehicles,
dispatch records, supervision, support services, etc., is not included
in this figure.
C - Extrapolating the gross cost of 19,040 burglar alarms @18.4 minutes
each and @$13.20 per hour for an average response of 2.7 officers per
alarm; the costs to the City are $208,099 per year to respond to alarms,
98% of which are false.
D. The anticipated costs to administer this ordinance are:
$ 2,800 postage (19,040 at 15 each)
4,200 police salaries and fringe benefits (calling in
brief reports - one minute @22 per minute)
10,000 pro -rated clerical support, hearing officer,
coordinator, etc.
$17,000 TOTAL
E. The ordinance sets out that a copy of the police report will ac-
company the bill for service. These reports normally are provided at
a fee of eight dollars ($8.00) pursuant to City ordinance. The $25.00
fee will cover the costs of report generation on the Computer Assisted
Report Entry System.
F. The projected revenue for FY 79-80 at 100% compliance would be
$476,000. Given the collection process and lack of stiff sanctions,
a more realistic level of compliance would be 60% - or an equivalent
"revenue" of $285,000.
G. During FY 80=81, the level of compliance should increase to 80%
while the number of false alarms should decrease to approximately
15,000 per year thereby generating "income" of $300,000.
H. If the anticipated rate of decrease in false alarm calls is not
realized within eighteen months, the City will explore a combination
of alternatives: (1) increasing fees or using a sliding scale; (2)
issuing alarm user permits; (3) refusal to respond to or reduce re-
sponse priority for habitual violators; (4) license installers set-
ting strict technical standards.
KIH:cw
cc: Law Department
Finance Department
Page 4 of 4
8996 -4
TO. Joseph R. Grassie
City Manager
t)01,14.11(... tiativvt4
Kenneth I. Harms
Chief of Police
FRO.
September 20, 1979 LEG 9-2
Burglary and Robbery Alarm
Ordinance
,,r-pm -1
Additional information
One
Please include the attached data as background material for
the proposed Burglary and Robbery Alarm Ordinance.
The Source Printout has up-to-the-minute data which was not
available prior to agenda submission deadline.
KIH:cw
cc: Law Department
8996 °
CITY OP MIAMI. FLORIOA
INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO Kenneth I. Harms
Chief of Police
FROM
(Thrpugh Channels)
•
. R. Boemler
Planning and Inspections
DATE:
SUBJECT
September 18, 1979
FILE LEG 9-2
Recent Burglary & Robbery
Alarm Statistics
REFERENCES:
ENCLOSURES:
Attached is a hand tally of an incident -by -incident printout
of all original signal 25's entered into C.A.D. from 1-1-79
through 9-5-79 and projections to the end of the year. Salient
points are:
1 - If the trends continue for the next three months,
burglary alarms dispatched will equal approximately
23,912. This will be an increase of over 25% from
1978's total of 19,040 alarms.
2 - The false alarm rate has been revalidated as over
98%. This figure has remained relatively stable over
the last three or four years.
3 - Only 267 actual crimes were detected to date this
year. Of these, only 50 incidents resulted in 75
direct non -robbery arrests and 1 direct robbery
arrest. During this same period, the Miami Police
Department has made a total of:
370 adult robbery arrests
156 juvenile robbery arrests
401 adult burglary arrests
457 juvenile burglary arrests
4 - The total of 76 burglar alarms initiated arrests listed
on the attached sheet cost the City approximately $208,000
in officers' time (not counting court testimony over-
time, mileage or administrative overhead) or $2,737
per arrest which is certainly not cost effective from
a Police Department perspective.
5 - Officers should be instructed to change final signals
to correspond to actual events; arrival times are con-
spicuously sparse.
Page 1 of 2
g996.
1979 ARRESTS RESULTING FROM BURGLAR ALARMS
INCIDENT 1t
0013722D
0173007D
0283132D
0313689D
0433845D
0453103D
059 3001 D
0613061D
0633752D
0653037D
0773161D
0773172D
0783240D
0803098D
08431I3D
0853127D
0933850D
1023682D
1043665D
1053003D
1133177D
1163032D
1183347 D
1303774D
1333113D
1403148D
1403174D
1493079D
1573030D
1673580D
167 3799 D
1723002D
1753027D
1753256D
ADDRESS
1037 N.W. 21 Terr.
1300 Biscayne Blvd.
2300 N.W. 23 St.
N. Miami SC 23 St.
125 N.E. 6 St.
1832 N.W. 36 St.
1331 N.W. 46 SAt.
1200 S.W. 8 St.
3875 Shipping
2975 S.W. 32 Ave.
127 N.E. 27 St.
1237 N. Miami Ave.
169 E. Flagler St.
50 N.W. 10 St.
4901 S.W. 8 St.
511 N.E. 15 St.
1051 N.W. 29 Terr.
1236 N. Miami Ave.
3841 N.E. 2 Ave.
1500 N.W. N. River Dr.
101 N.E. 1 Ave.
51 E. Flagler St.
2201 N. Miami Ave.
2100 N. Miami Ave.
2177 N.E. 8 Ave.
1699 N.W. 27 Ave.
2200 N.W. 12 Ave.
1305 S.W. 8 St.
7240 N.E. 4 Ct.
1200 N.W. 6 Ave.
1931 N.W. 1 Ave.
3290 N.W. 7 St.
4700 N.W. 12 Ave.
300 N.E. 50 St.
DATE -TIME REPORTS
I/ 1 /79-2216 1B, IA
1/17-0011 IB, IA
1/28-0321 1 B, I A
1/31-2205 1B, 1MV, 13
2/12-2249 -, 3A
2/14-0333 1B, 2A
2/28-0000 18, 2A, 23
3/2-0204 1B, 2A
3/4-2322 -, IA
3/6-0105 1B, 2A
3/18-0358 1B, IA
3/18-0447 1B, 1A
3/19-1022 IR, 1A
3/21-0431 1B, 13
3/25-0310 -, IA
3/26-0808 1 B, 1 A
4/3-2331 1B, 33
4/12-2136 1B, 2A
4/14-2110 -, IA
4/15-0008 1B, IA
4/23-0906 -, IA
4/26-0044 1B, IA
4/28-1237 -, 3A
5/10-2228 -, IA
5/13-0308 1B, 2A
5/20-0422 1B, 2A
5/20-0542 1B, 2A
5/29-0318 1B, IA
6/6-0142 -, 23, IA
6/16-1810 IG, 13, IA
6/16-2312 IG, IA
6/21-0001 1B, 2A
6/24-0031 1B, 23
6/24-1001 IB, IA
CITY OF MIAMI. FLORIDA
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO.
FROM
Kenneth I. Harms
Chief of Police
(Thrpugh Channels)
'''�!v'
. R. Boemler
Planning and Inspections
DATE:
September 18, 1979
FILE LEG 9-2
SUBJECT: Recent Burglary & Robbery
Alarm Statistics
REFERENCES:
ENCLOSURES:
Attached is a hand tally of an incident -by -incident printout
of all original signal 25's entered into C.A.D. from 1-1-79
through 9-5-79 and projections to the end of the year. Salient
points are:
1 - If the trends continue for the next three months,
burglary alarms dispatched will equal approximately
23,912. This will be an increase of over 25% from
1978's total of 19,040 alarms.
2 - The false alarm rate has been revalidated as over
98%. This figure has remained relatively stable over
the last three or four years.
3 - Only 267 actual crimes were detected to date this
year. Of these, only 50 incidents resulted in 75
direct non -robbery arrests and 1 direct robbery
arrest. During this same period, the Miami Police
Department has made a total of:
370 adult robbery arrests
156 juvenile robbery arrests
401 adult burglary arrests
457 juvenile burglary arrests
4 - The total of 76 burglar alarms initiated arrests listed
on the attached sheet cost the City approximately $208,000
in officers' time (not counting court testimony over-
time, mileage or administrative overhead) or $2,737
per arrest which is certainly not cost effective from
a Police Department perspective.
5 - Officers should be instructed to change final signals
to correspond to actual events; arrival times are con-
spicuously sparse.
Page 1 of 2 q 9
Kenneth I. Harms September 18, 1979
Lt. L. R. Boemler Burglary/Robbery Alarm Statistics
The Miami Police Department's Computer System Staff was able to
produce this 763 page report in a very timely manner within a
few days of the request and should be commended on their per-
formance. This report will be kept for future analysis, veri-
fication and rebuttal from alarm industry interests.
LRB:cw
Attachments
Page 2 of 2
1979 ARRESTS RESULTING FROM BURGLAR ALARMS
INCIDENT 1!
0013722D
0173007 D
0283132D
0313689D
0433845D
0453103D
0593001 D
0613061D
0633752D
0653037 D
0773161D
0773172D
0783240D
0803098D
0843113D
0853127D
0933850D
1023682D
1043665D
1053003D
1133177D
1163032D
1183347 D
1303774D
1333113D
1403148D
1403174D
1493079 D
1573030D
1673580D
1673799D
1723002D
1753027D
1753256D
ADDRESS
1037 N.W. 21 Terr.
1300 Biscayne Blvd.
2300 N.W. 23 St.
N. Miami do 23 St.
125 N.E. 6 St.
1832 N.W. 36 St.
1331 N.W. 46 SAt.
1200 S.W. 8 St.
3875 Shipping
2975 S.W. 32 Ave.
127 N.E. 27 St.
1237 N. Miami Ave.
169 E. Flagler St.
50 N.W. 10 St.
4901 S.W. 8 St.
511 N.E. 15 St.
1051 N.W. 29 Terr.
1236 N. Miami Ave.
3841 N.E. 2 Ave.
1500 N.W. N. River Dr.
101 N.E. 1 Ave.
51 E. Flagler St.
2201 N. Miami Ave.
2100 N. Miami Ave.
2177 N.E. 8 Ave.
1699 N.W. 27 Ave.
2200 N.W. 12 Ave.
1305 S.W. 8 St.
7240 N.E. 4 Ct.
1200 N.W. 6 Ave.
1931 N.W. l Ave.
3290 N.W. 7 St.
4700 N.W. 12 Ave.
300 N.E. 50 St.
DATE -TIME REPORTS
1 /1 /79-2216 18,1A
1/17-0011 18,1A
1/28-0321 1 B,1 A
1/31-2205 IB, IMV, 13
2/12-2249 -, 3A
2/14-0333 1B, 2A
2/28-0000 1B, 2A, 23
3/2-0204 1B, 2A
3/4-2322 -, IA
3/6-0105 1B, 2A
3/18-0358 1B, IA
3/18-0447 IB, IA
3/19-1022 IR, IA
3/21-0431 1B, 13
3/25-0310 -, IA
3/26-0808 1B, IA
4/3-2331 1B, 33
4/12-2136 1B, 2A
4/14-2110 -, 1A
4/15-0008 1B, IA
4/23-0906 -, IA
4/26-0044 1B, IA
4/28-1237 -, 3A
5/10-2228 -, IA
5/13-0308 1B, 2A
5/20-0422 IB, 2A
5/20-0542 IB, 2A
5/29-0318 1B, IA
6/6-0142 -, 23, IA
6/16-1810 IG, 13, IA
6/16-2312 IG, IA
6/21-0001 18, 2A
6/24-0031 I B, 23
6/24-1001 IB, IA
i i iA: 2
1979 n 't ESTS RESULTING FROM BURGrit ALARMS
INCIDENT I/
1843077D
1893699D
1923026D
1943641D
2013712D
2063010D
2133180D
2143563D
2143704D
2163067D
2213322D
2243218D
2273084D
2383074D
2433010D
2453795D
ADDRESS
4545 N.W. 7 St.
3601 N.W. 17 Ave.
324 N.E. 13.St.
314 N.W. 12 St.
1140 N. Miami Ave.
1200 N.W. 36 St.
801 N. Miami Ave.
1581 St. Brickell Ave.
3351 Matilda
3000 N.W. 12 Ave.
3866 N.W. 7 St.
900 N.E. Biscayne Blvd.
6505 N.E. 2 Ave.
950 N.W. 36 St.
6301 N.W. 7 Ave.
119 N.W. 2 St.
DATE -TIME
7/3-0235
7/8-2350
7/11-0059
7/13-1939
7/20-2239
7/25-0021
8/1-0948
8/2-1825
8/2-2142
8/4-0151
8/9-1254
8/12-1017
8/15-0241
8/26-0129
8/31-0018
9/2-2341
REPORTS
1B, 13
1B, IA
1B, IA
1B, 13
1B, IA
1B, IA
1B, IA
IB, IA
1B, 13
1B, 23
-,IA
1B, 1P, 1A
IB, 1A
1B, 13, 1A
1B, 13, IA
1B, 3A
TOTAL ALARMS
TOTAL POLICE
(extrapolua
entered an
FINAL SIGNALS
14 MISCELLP,t
26 ACTUAL At
27 LARCENIE
27 OTHER THi
28 VANDAL'S!
29 HOLD UP i
32 ASSAULTS
47 FIRE
49 EXPLOSIOt
TOTAL VALID
FINAL SIGNALS
13 MISCELLAN
34 DISTURBAN
35 DRUNK . .
38 SUSPICIOU
25 OTHER FAL
TOTAL INVAL
NON-DISPATCHE
•
FALSE ALARM
_FALSE ALARM
*IN 28 INSTAN
•COMPLETION OF
ERROR CAUSED
CES
YEAR TO DATE:
SEPT. 5, 1979
(Julian 248)
PROJECTED TO END O
YEAR (actual x
1.472)
ADULT DIRECT ARRES
(YEAR TO DATE -
Sept. 5, 197D)
ADULT DIRECT ARRES
(PROJECTED 79 -
actital x 1.4721
JUVENILE DIRECT AT
PREHENSION (YTD
Sept. 5. 19791
JUVENILE DIRECT A'
(PROJECTED 79 -
NCOMING (ORIGINAL SIGNAL 25, ALL ENTERED INCIDENTS)
19,058
28,053
0 I 0 0 0 0 0 tI0000000rnw
DISPATCHES TO ALARM SIGNALS = 85.24%
16,245
23,912
.ed from sample data pages 500-600 where a unit has been
. dispatched; not all "7" codes equal 01)
CRIMINAL
IEOUS CRIMINAL ACTIVITY
10
13
D ATTEMPTED BURGLARIES*
188
42
FROM AUTO
1
0
FTS . . .
3
1
t
56
0
:OBBERIES
5
1
2
0
1
0
I
1
0
ALARMS
267
393
57
82
28
NON -CRIMINAL TO WHICH RESPONSE IS MADE
EOUS NON -CRIMINAL
23
0
CE
9
0
1
1
S PERSON
4
0
SE ALARMS
15,941
0
D ALARMS
15,978
23,519
1
1
0
1 INCIDENTS
2,813
TE (15,978 i 16,245) =98.36% OF DISPATCHED ALARMS
TE (18,791 4 19,058) =98.60% of all RECEIVED ALARMS
OFFICERS NEGLECTED TO CHANGE FINAL SIGNAL AFTER ANNOUNCING
CRIMINAL FIELD REPORTS. IN TWO INSTANCES OPERATOR OR MACHINE
FINAL SIGNAL TO BE INCORRECT.
c
i
•
•
'll
Ip''
I II
'
G. Patrick Gallagher, Director
Police Executive Institute
1909 X Street, M. W.
Suite 400
t;ashington, D. C. 20006
Dear Pat,
Thank you for including the City of Miami as a resource in the
Alarm Management Study. As you know, the City of Miami faces
an acute dilemma with regards to false alarms. Mot only are
our scarce resources being constantly depleted, but my officers'
safety is imperiled by subtle psychological expectations that
each alarm is false. On the other hand, we actively encourage
installation of relaiable alarm systems as an adjunct to rou-
tine patrol or surveillance. The problem has been studied
in the past by our department. t:e are very supportive of your
efforts in this regard and will provide whatever assistance is
possible.
At the present time, an alarm ordinance is being prepared for
the City of 1'iami. Other cities are experiencing difficulties
in administering their alarm ordinances. The handbook described
in your concept paper could potentially contribute to our docu-
mentation and control efforts. Under consideration are reporting
alternatives through our Computer Assisted Report Entry (CARE).
Computer Assisted Dispatch (CAD)or crime resource allocation and
mapping systems. Manual interims systems may be necessary.
Responding to your questionnaire, I have attached a description
of the process utilized. I have also included prior studies on
the problem; a draft ordinance under development; the Dade County
ordinance dealing with automatic telephonic dialing taper' alarms;
competency certification for alarm installers and the intentional
generation of false alarms.
erely,
144.4te2Z / n
ig/2471/i,
P.enneth I . Farms
Chief of Police
MIfl:cw LRB
Attachments
bc: Tom Connors - Asst. Chief Doherty - Asst. Chief Griffin -
Major Gunn - Sgt. Wiggins - Crime Prevention Unit - Planning & Inspections40,
METHODOLGY
The answer to question 2 of the survey was estimated by
Mr. Jerry Woodall, past president of Florida Chapter of
National Burglar Alarm Association. He will be polling
members companies at our request for response to your
inquiry.
The answer to question 6 is year-end totals produced by
our Computer Assisted Dispatch (CAD) System.
The answers to questions 8, 9, 10 and 11 are derived from
a non-random sample of the first 3,712 incidents of a
1977 printout of each of the 19,325 alarm incidents gener-
ated that year. This printout was for each extracted
burglary/alarm incident which was then sorted first by
block number and then by street or avenue. This sample
thus contains a preponderance of downtown addresses or
addresses along Flagler Street and Miami Avenue (our
quadrant dividing lines).
The answer to question 10, showing 266 responses, is to
an office building with 230 offices, primarily jewelry -
oriented, at 36 N. E. 1st Street.
The answer to question 11, showing 211 responses, is to
an office building with 116 offices at 117 N. E. 1st
Avenue.
No other location showed these excessive trends.
This printout (which is ten inces high) is available
for your analysis - providing security and individuality
is maintained.
The answer to question 15 is based on a previous analysis
of seven weeks of data. More detailed information from
1978 data is pending a statistical printout oriented
towards norms and distributions of time spent on the scene
of all calls for service.
LICE EXECUTIVE INSTITUTE t
ALARM DATA SURVEY
N.B. Please respond to the following questions with an estimated number. Exact
figures are not necessary. Please confine your answers to either 1977 or
1970. If any questions are not applicable or a number is impossible to
calculate, please so state with "N/A" or "Unavailable."
;lame of Police Executive:
Name of Police Agency:
Address:
KENNETH I. HARMS
CITY OF MIAMI POLICE DEPARTMENT
400 N. W. 2nd Avenue
Miami, Florida 33128
Telephone 'lumber: (305) 579-6565
"lame of person completing Year of
questionnaire: L • R. BOEMLER data: 1977
1. Does your city/county/state have ordinances or codes to control t.I.. installation,
maintenance, or operation of burglar alarm systems?
No (city) Yes (Dade County)
(If yes, please include a copy)
2. Approximately how many burglar alarms are installed in your jurisdiction?
Total number: 7 t000 - 9 ,goo
3. Approximately how many are directly connected into the police department?
Total number: one
4. What is your definition of a false alarm? (National Guard Armory)
SEE ATTACHED DRAFT ORDINANCE
5. Do you have any alarm classifications other than ''false" and "actual"? If
so, what are they?
a. NONE
b.
6. What was the total number of police responses to burglar alarms in 1977 or 197G?
Total number:
19,040 (1978)
19,325 (1977)
L+41. f` ri
%�h3t oercentage of the alarms •were classified as false?
Falsing, percentage: 98% - 99%
6. :What was the estimated total number of addresses responded to?
574 x 5.205 Total number: 21988
9. How many of these addresses (approximately) were responded to 15 or more times?
66 x 5.205
Total number:
10. What was the most responses made to one address?
36 N. E. 1st St. (1977)
Total number:
344
266
11. What was the second highest number of responses to one address?
117 N. E. 1st Ave. (1977) Total number: 211
12. What is the average hourly salary (excluding benefits) for patrol officers?
Average hourly salary:g 9.00
13. What is the estimated average number of cars responding to an alarm?
Average number: 2.2 (estimated)
14. What is the estimated average number of officers responding to an alarm?
Average number: 2.7 (estimated)
15. What is the estimated average length of time that the first responding unit
spent at the scene of a false alarm?
Average time spent: 12.7 minutes (1978)
13.0 minutes (1977)
Please return the completed questionnaire in the enclosed self -address envelope
by April 15, 1979, to:
G. Patrick Gallagher
Director
Police Executive Institute
1909 K Street, N. W.
Suite 400 •
Washington, D. C. 20006
SIZE SAMPLE 3,712
(out of 19,325 total) = 19.21%
rts
tiU3
March 2, 1979
Dear Law Enforcement Executive:
1909 K Street NW
Suite 400
Washington DC 20006
Phone (202) 833-1460
Francis W. Sargent
Chairman.of the Board
Patrick V. Murphy
President
The Police Executive Institute, in keeping with our continuous effort to.
respond to the needs of agencies participating in the Institute's activities,
is interested in assessing on a very preliminary basis the extent of a pro-
blem which has been brought to light in one of our courses: "The Executive
and the Patrol Function."
With the recent increases in crime and the constant efforts to combat it,
businesses and increasingly many residences, are turning to the utilization
of burglar alarm systems to improve their security and that of their opera-
tions, assets, and possessions. These systems range from the simplistic to
the highly sophisticated depending on the user's needs, available equipment
and related expenses. While the increased use of burglar alarm systems has
unquestionably improved the level of security, there is a cost, a cost borne
by local police departments which must respond repeatedly to alarms activated
by actual intrusions, system failures, or employee errors. Costs to police
departments include not only the dollars and cents of responding, but also the
diversion of decreased patrol resources for prolonged periods of time from
other calls for servce.
At this time, the police Executive Institute is considering assisting in a
national study to determine the significance of, and reined es for, false burglar
alarms. The project will probaolv�be funded over a four year period by the
National Science Foundation and will involve contributions frcm most of the
organizations which have an interest in the problem, both in the public and
private seders. A number of resource cities will participate in the initial
effort to collect comprehensive alarm data, and ocssibly later, to implement and
assess the remedial measures developed during the study.
At this point, knowing your interest in improving police services and in the
more oroducti•ie use of available resources, I solicit your cooperation to the
extent cf sharing your burglar alarm experience and the extent of the fa:sing
alarm problem with us and indicating your possible :•,illiroress to rarticinate
in the study as a resource city. I need your assistance in collecting sole
raw figures on the scone of the problem and in delineating the issues which must
be addressed.
I have Inclosed the following:
o A concept paper discussing the proposed research effort on this
topic, indicating the general outline of the approach.
Law Enforcement'Exeru tivq
March 2, 1979
Page two
• A brief questionnaire of alarm related questions meant to give
us a quick feel for the state of the Problem in your jurisdiction.
(If raw data are not available, then feel free to make estimates -
or merely state that a problem exists, and you would be interested
•in research to develop a sound alarm systems management program.)
The replies will demonstrate the need for such a study, and the
apparent magnitude of the problem.
In addition to returning the questionnaire, if you could furnish a cover letter
commenting on the scope of the Problem, the amount of resources used, and your
interest in the research, I would be most grateful, and I feel in the long run,
the orofession would benefit. While expressing no firm commitment, if you feel
that down the line your agency might be interested in participating as a resource
city, please include that in your letter. Please address replies directly to
me at the Police Executive Institute.
As usual, I am most appreciative of your interest in this, as well as all our
other activities. The time you might take in filling out the questionnaire and
in writing the letter will be very worthwhile and I will make the compilation
of all the raw data available to you as soon as possible. Thanks for your
cooperation.
Sincerely,
G. Patrick Gallhgher
Director
Police Executive Institute
GPG:kr
Enclosures
Please return your letter and Questionnaire in the self-addressed envelope to:
G. Patrick Gallagher
Director
Police Executive Institute
1909 K Street, ' . W.
Suite 400
Washington, D, C. 20006
• ,
A NATIONAL BURGLAR ALARM MANAGEMENT STUDY
The study is addressed to the issue of "false' burglar alarms and
to the development of means to manage the problem at the local government
level. Three general aoproaches are considered:
(1) Control of Alarm Systems Technology.
(2) Control of Installations Through Codes and Ordinances.
(3)
Selection of Police Response Models Appropriate to Alarm
Expectations.
The study will proceed through 4 phases:
• Definition of what constitutes a "false" alarm and comprehensive
data collection to define national experience accordingly. In
parallel with this effort an assessment of the state-of-the-art
in alarm technology will be carried out (1 year).
• Analysis of alarm data and formulations of system management
concepts for use at the local government level. The three.
conceptual areas considered above will be addressed (1 year).
• Implementation of the management concepts in selected cities
(1 year).
• Post -implementation data collection and analysis and refinement
of the management guidelines.
The study product will ultimately be a handbook for use by local
agencies far assessing their alarm situation and formulating a suitable
management plan for increasing the effectiveness of locally installed burglar
alarms.
The study will depend on the cooperation of a group of resource
cities to first collect alarm data over a period of 1 year through investi-
gative report of each alarm. It is anticipated that as many as a half
million such reports will be collected. The cities plus others will also
be asked to use the draft handbook to develop and implement alarm manage-
ment systems in their cities and to collect data to measure the new system
effectiveness. Some grant assistance may be available for this effort.
Dear Law Enforcement Executive:
Gf i i. c f Ins
Chief cf Pclice
f•'.ami, Fla.
r.p �
t
:i 1979
RECEIVED
...J', W ,•.• • •...
SJIIE £.1;,
Vvat.hrrigron DC :: QC.
Phone 1202i F33 1460
Francis W Sargent
Chairman of the Board
Patrick V Murphq
President
In early March, the Police Executive Institute solicited the cooperation
of police departments across the country in gathering information about
burglar alarms. Specifically, we were interested in your experiences with
burglar alarms and the false alarms they generate. Our questionnaire was
intended to collect raw data to be used in determining the scope of the
problem and in identifying issues which should be addressed in future
research efforts. I would like to thank you for your responses and relate
some preliminary findings. Respondents nationwide indicate high false
alarm rates and most supported the need for more in depth research into
the problem.
_ All responses from 82 completed questionnaires were tabulated, totaled,
and averages calculated where appropriate. The range of answers (lowest
and highest) was also noted. This was done to illustrate the extreme
answers, rather than averages alone. This information can be found in
Table I - Results of Questionnaire. Figures One through Five illustrate
the responses for specific questions. The axis labeled "survey responses"
indicates the number of respondent:) whose answers fell into the same
grouping (i.e., total number of responses per category).
Once again, on behalf of the Police Foundation, I would like to extend
my appreciation for your support. Should more specific information be
desired, please feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
,c
G. Patrick Gallagher
Director
Police Executive Institute
GPG:nc
encl.
110• 89
I
1,1
.I IIl1 III
TABLE 1
RESULTS OF QUESTIONNAIRES
N = 82
RANGE
highest
3 answers
lowest
3 answers
AVERAGE
CUMULATIVE
TOTAL"`*
TOTAL RE-SPOU:
(TR)*
Do you have an ordinance?
37-yes
43-no
TR = 80
Approximately how many burglar alarms are
70,000
0
4,043.58
222,397
TR =
installed in your ,jurisdiction?
17,500
65
burglar
15,000
157
alarms
Approximately how many are directly connected
5,000
0
176.86
13,088
TR = 74
to the police department?
1,875
9
directly
592
23
connected
Total number of police responses to burglar
120,000
58
10,595.67
794,675
TR = 75
alarms?
111,182
240
police
60,000
353
responses
Percentage of 'alarms classified as false?
99.83
78
95.06%
TR = 71
99.7
80
99.1
85
Total number of addresses responded to?
30,895
10
133,897
TR = 47
••
30,000
150
10,524
164
Number of addresses responded to 15 or more
5,000
0
TR = 48
times?
2,786
9 '
10,468
720 ;
'
•
10
*Total number of respondents who answered the question.
**Cumulative total of all responses to the question.
TABLE 1
CONTINUED
IIIGII
CUMULATIVE TOTAL RESPONS`.
LOW AVERAGE ' TOTAL (TR)
Most responses made to one address?
240
200
150
5
7
12
53.56 2571
TR = 48
Second highest number of responses made
to one address?
220
150
145
4
5
10
186E
TR = 47
Patrol officers average hourly salary
(excluding benefits)?
$10.50
4.46
7.93
TR = 80
Average number of cars responding to an alarm?
Average number of officers responding to
an alarm?
•
Average length of time spent at the scene
of a false alarm?
60
3B
19
1
2
TR = 77
1
5
10
2.9
17
TR =
TR = 77
2
0
4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
DOLLARS/HOUR
PATROL OFFICERS AVERAGE HOURLY SALARY
Figure 1
. 3n ..__
SURVEY RESPONSES
25
20
15
10
5
0
N=77
0
10 20
MINUTES
30
40
AVERAGE LENGTH OF TItMME THAT THE FIRST
RESPONDING UNIT SPENT AT THE SCENE OF A FALSE ALARM
Figure 2
50
2
0
0 50 1O0 150 200 250
NUMBER OF RESPONSES
!•LOST RESPONSES MADE TO ONE ADDRESS
Figure 3
16
14
12
6
4
2
0
N = 71
90 92 94 96 98 100
PERCENT
PERCENTAGE OF ALARMS CLASSIFIED AS FALSE
Figure 4
Note: Not included on histogram are five responses that
were below 90% false. They were 78%, 80%, 85%,
87% and 87.5%.
SURVEY RESPONSES
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
N 43
0 50 100 150 200 250
NUMBER OF ADDRESSES
NUMBER OF ADDRESSES RESPONDED TO MORE THAN 15 TIMES
Figure 5
Note.: Not included on histogram are five responses which were over
250 addresses. They were 169, 502, 72C, 2,780 and 5,000.
i
BURGLAR ALARM STUDY
January, 1976
Operation Analysis and Research
February, 1976
PURPOSE
A study was conducted during January, 1976 to ac-
quire statistical data on burglar alarms. The purpose --
was to determine the extent of invalid calls to the City
of Miami Police Department.
8996
i
ALARM FACT SHEET
To be completed on each call involving an alarm
Date
Address
Time Zone
Unit responding # Number of units on scene
Business Name
Owner Name Phone
Owner Address
How long did it take owner to arrive on scene?
Type of alarm ( ) Audible ( ) Silent
Alarm owned by ( ) Business ( ) Alarm Company
Name of Alarm Company
Representative of Alarm Co. on scene?
Before P.D. After P.D.
Reason for Alarm:
B&E Robbery Attempt B&E
Attempt Robbery Defective Alarm
Employee Error Cause Unknown
Other (Explain)
Was suspect apprehended?
Time on scene for P.D.
Is Emergency Numbet on building? ( ) Yes ( ) No
TABLE I
PURPOSE
A study was conducted during January, 1976 to ac—
quire statistical data on burglar alarms. The purpose
was to determine the extent of invalid calls to the City
of Miami Police Department.
89 gg
f4
eir
METHOD
A questionnaire (See Table I) was designed by the
Operations Analysis and Research Unit and copies were
forwarded to the Complaint Room. Instructions were given
to the Communications Operators as well as all Patrol
Officers as to the correct method of filling out the forms.
= The officers were told to call back in after handling the
call to complete the form.
Along with the data requested, a list was compiled
of those locations where the alarm went off more than once
(See Appendix A).
ALARM FACT SHEET
To be completed on each call involving an alarm
Date
Address
Time Zone
Unit responding fNumber of units on scene
Business Name
Owner Name Phone
Owner Address
How long did it take owner to arrive on scene?
Type of alarm ( ) Audible ( ) Silent
- Alarm owned by ( ) Business ( ) Alarm Company
Name of Alarm Company
Representative of Alarm Co. on scene?
Before P.D. After P.D.
f-
Reason for Alarm: 1
i-
__ i
B&E Robbery Attempt BCE
Attempt Robbery Defective Alarm
Employee Error Cause Unknown
Other (Explain)
Was suspect apprehended?
Time on scene for P.D.
Is Emergency Number on building? ( ) Yes ( ) No
TABLE I
8996
RESULTS
Tables II thru XIII summarize the study. Table II
shows that 37% of the alarm calls are received on either
Sunday or Monday. In an attempt to break this down fur-
ther Table II adds that 34% are received between the hours
of 6 p.m. and midnight. Table IV displays the calls by
zone and sector of occurrance. Tables V thru VII show how
many police vehicles were on the scene in comparison to
the number of owners and alarm companies showing up.
The causes for the calls are shown is Table VIII. Un-
fortunately nothing was noted in 48% of the cases. The
amount of time spent by the Department on the scene is
broken down in Table IX. Display of emergency numbers is
noted in Table X.
The alarm companies with the highest number of alarms
going off are shown in Table XI.
Tables XII and XIII reflect the type and ownership
of the alarm.
Appendix A lists the name, address, owner, and fre-
quency for chronic offenders. There were 257 such offenders
in January accounting for some 780 calls or 62% of all alarm
calls.
% OF CALLS BY ZONE AND SECTOR
TABLE IV
ZONE % SECTOR
11 1%
12 4%
13 1%
14 2%
21 3%
22 -
23 5%
24 1%
25 1%
26 4%
31 5%
32
33 3%
34 1%
35 4%
36 3%
41 4%
42 4%
43 1%
44 1%
10 8%
20 14%
30 16%
DAY OF WEEK
OF CALLS
Monday 19%
Tuesday 14%
Wednesday 14%
Thursday 10%
Friday 12%
Saturday 13%
Sunday 18%
100%
TABLE II
TIME OF DAY
OF CALLS
0001 - 0300 11%
0301. - 0600 10%
0601 - 0900 13%
0901 - 1200 12%
1201 - 1300 8%
1501 - 1800 12%
1801 - 2100 17%
2101 - 2400 17%
100%
TABLE III .
ZONE %
45 2%
46 4%
47 3%
48 1%
49 4%
61 3%
62 6%
63 6%
64 2%
65 3%
66 4%
71 3%
72 5%
73 1%
74 2%
75 2%
76 1%
SECTOR
40 24%
60 24%
70 14%
NUMBER OF UNITS ON SCENE
TABLE V
Number of Units % of Calls
1 42%
2 49%
3
4
Over 4
LENGTH OF TIME UNTIL OWNER ARRIVED
TABLE VI
Did not show 57%
On scene or less than 5 min. 31%
6 - 10 min. 3%
11 - 15 min. 3%
16 - 20 min. 2%
21 - 25 min. 1%
26 - 30 min. 2%
Over 30 min. 1%
•
REPRESENTATIVE OF ALARM COMPANY ON SCENE
TABLE V11
Yes
No
of Time
32%
68%
100%
Before Police Department 40%
After Police Department 60%
CAUSE FOR ALARM
TABLE VIII
Breaking & Entering 1%
Attempted B&E 1%
Defective Alarm 26%
Employee Error 22%
Other 2%
Unknown 48%
100%
TIME SPENT AT SCENE
TABLE IX
Less than 6 minutes 32%
6 - 10 minutes 26%
11 - 15 minutes 18%
16 - 20 minutes 10%
21 - 25 6%
26 - 30 3%
31 - 35 " 1%
36 - 40 minutes 1%
41 - 45 1%
46 - 50 1%
51 - 55
56 or more minutes 1%
100%
Median = 9 minutes/call
DISPLAY OF EMERGENCY
Telephone Numbers
TABLE X
Yes 35%
No 65%
100%
ALARM COMPANIES
TABLE XI
Company
ADT
Burns
Marriott
Wells Fargo
Systems for Security
Wackenhut
Coral Way
Southern
Century
AAA Security
American Protection
Farrey
Stevenson
Allstate
Rollins
CESS
Sonitrol
Metro Security
All Others
of Calls
14%
12%
12%
11%
8%
8%
4%
3%
3%
2%
2% 0
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
14%
100%
TYI'E OF ALARM
Audible 41X
Silent 57
100
TABLE XII
OWNER OF ALARM
Business 2%
Alarm Company 98%
100%
TABLE XIII
In order to determine the feasibility of implementing direct line
communications between the Complaint Center of the Miami Police
Department and the Marriott Security System, information was gathered
as reflected in annex one.
The number of calls received by the complaint center concerning
ringing alarms and the disposition of these calls reflects the fol-
lowing:
1,100 calls during the month of May, 1975, resulted in fourteen actual
burglaries. One thousand and eighty-six of these calls were false
alarms. This represents .01% of the calls where alarms were ringing
actually resulting in a burglary.
On only nine occasions did a representative of the alarm or security
company arrive on the scene of the ringing alarm before the arrival of
a police unit.
On 827 out of 1,100 calls, the security company did not respond at
all; while on 265 occasions a representative arrived after the police
were on the scene.
As the foregoing figures reflect the amount of patrol time lost while
checking out alarms is grossly disproportionate to the results, fourteen
good calls out of 1,100. An average of eleven minutes per call reflects
a time investment of more than two hundred hours during one month.
As a result of this research, I cannot recommend the installation of a
direct line for Marriott, as calls either directly from this company
or from other sources concerning Marriott alarms ringing totaled 173
during May with one resulting in an actual offense.
The breakdown for each of forty-two companies reflected in the survey
for May is included in annex one and indicates that legislation penalizing
companies for excessive false alarms is desirable.
Installation of direct lines for any security company'°is definitely not
recommended, as the proportion of actual offenses brought to our attention
by the various security companies is minimal.
A city ordinance penalizing security companies whose alarms ring causing
police to be summoned on a false alarm more than once in a six month
period, is strongly recommended.
A proposed ordinance is included as Annex II.
•
COMPANY
CO. CALLED CITIZEN ON SCENE ON SCENE NOT ON oRu BREAK TOTAL CALLS
P.D. NOTIFIED BEFORE P.D. AFTER P.D. SCENE
Auto -Alarm 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1
American Sec. 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1
United Security 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1
Answer Alarm 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1
Trld Wide 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1
Security Systems 1 0 0
0 1 1 0 1
Sony Alarm 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1
Sight and Sound 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1
Electric Detection 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1
42
965 135 9 265 827 1,086 14 1,100
a
COMPANY
ADT
Burns
Marriott
Wackenhut
'ells Fargo
Systems for
Security
Delta
Miami Burglar
Alarm
Arco Electric
Honeywell
Southern
Answer Rite
Answer Service
Coral Way
Century
?a r rt!y
I II
CO..CALLED CITIZEN ON SCENE ON SCENE NOT ON (MUBREAK TOTAL CALLS
P.D. NOTIFIED BEFORE P.D. AFTER P.D SCENE
157 21 2 75 101 176 2 178 •
120 17 0 69 68 134 3 137
150 23 1 16 155 172 1 173
165 11 3 67 106 175 1 176
63 15 2 15 65 75 3 78
12 1 •11 61 70 3 • 73
161
28 3 0 2 29 31 0 31
25 6 0 4 26 30 1 31
22
20
11
10
12
13
18
12
7 0
2 0
1 0
10 0
0 0
3 0
0 1
4 0
1 28 29 0 29
3 19 22 0 22
1 11 12 0 12
0 20 20 0 20
0 12 12 0 12
1 15 16 0 16
0 17 18 0 18
0 16 16 0 16
u
COMPANY
CO. CALLED
P.D.
CITIZEN ON SCENE ON SCENE NOT ON QRU
NOTIFIED BEFORE P.D. AFTER P.D. SCENE
BREAK TOTAL CALLS
Answer Phone 12 0 0 • 0 12 12 0 12
.
Stevenson 9 0 0 0 9 9 0 9
AAA Security 7 0 0 0 7 7 0 7
Amer Protection 6 0 0 0 6 6 0 6
T stinghouse 6 0 0 0 6 6 0 6
Allstate 5 0 0 0 5 4 1 5
Inter American 4 0 0 0 4 4 0 4
Rollins 3 0 0 0 3 3 0 3
Reliable 3 0 0 0 3 3 0 3
CESS 3 0 0 0 3 3 0 3
Guardian 2 0 0 0 2 2 0 2
International 2 0 0 0 2 2 0 2
Patrol
-itAlarm Security 2
0 0 0 2 2 0 2
Intl Security 2 0 0 0 2 2 0 2
Security Engineer 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1
Alex Security 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1
Dade Security 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1
1
. ,.Iwl
CITY t)r MIAM1. i L.ORIOA
• INTER•OFFICE MEMORANDUM
Bernard L. Garnire,
Chief of Police
Through Channels
Officer Dale W. Thorp,
Plt. #4, K-9
DAT!1
.uai[CT/
24 Aug 69
Information
NEFEA PCC.I
ENCLO.UREYI
During a period of weeks, our officers answer burglar alarms at
the same businesses, finding them to be false alarms.
.......r..11•1111.
•
' About 90/ of our burglar or hold --up alarms turn out to be false. • •
Obviously response to this type of call exroses both the officers
and the public to unnecessary danger, and creates a false sense 1
:of security in the minds of our officers. ,
•
Therefore,
of logging
'more false
ito the top
if the complaint room could institute a procedure
all unfounded alarms, and upon receiving two or
alarms within a period of one month, direct a letter
official of such firm.
.In the letter we could point out some of the hazards and '
.ramifications inherent in this type of a call.
'•I'm sure that this procedure for reducing false alarms heightens
the possibility that a call is, in fact, notification of a
.robbery or a burglary, and the needed enthusiasm and caution
in which an officer will.•approach the scene will again return.
I
r•
.
• 1I i
f ,1
.� ,.
Of
•
.4
4. •
1.
' •I
• d
•
• '
• i
,;.
•
• .
•
•
•
•'
•
CITY OF MIAMI. FLORIDA
INTER -OFFICE MEMORANDUM
To: BERN RD L. GA}U1IRE
Chief of Police
Through Channels
momsLt •• Paul L. Oboz •
Complaint Room Supervisor
wATE: September 8, 1969 a•I�E:
SUOJECT: False Burglar and Hold-up Alarms
REFERENCES: Memo from Officer W. Thorp
ENCLOSURES: List of alarms by business an
frequency
•From January thru July 1969, the City of Miami Police Department
handled 2,991 false burglar & hold-up alarm calls. For each call,
one two man unit or two one man units were sent. In those cases
where the business was a large one, a total of four or five units
may have been needed to properly cover the scene. Due to the large
number of such calls, I recorded only those businesses which put
in four or more alarms during the seven month period. They are
listed by frequency of occurrence and alphabetically for easy reference
It is interesting to note that the 197 businesses recorde4l are
responsible for 1,491 calls or 50% of the total number dispatched.
A.D.T. is the most frequently used service. It is not unrealistic
_to assume that many of these calls reflect extreem carelesness
on the part of the leasee or a deficiency in alarm equipment.
I concur with Officer Thorp that a departmental effort be
made to reduce the number of such calls. A letter from the Office
of the Chief of Police to the parties concerned would have a
•considerable impact in correcting the situation. On September 17,
I will be a guest at the National Seminar on Security to be held
at the•Dupont Plaza Hotel. I will use that opportunity to furthur
our goal of a more meaningful alarm system in the city.
F
•
•
i
SURVEY OF BURGLAR AND HOLD UP ALARMS FOR' P ERIOD OF
Lt. Paul L. Oboz
• • •
•
INDEX
PAGE
NUMBER OF BUSINESSES WITH NUMBER OF ALARMS FROM 1
EACH - 4 OR MORE CALLS
ALARM SERVICES RECORDED ON. C.R. CARDS AND THIER 2
FREQUENCY
BUSINESSES LISTED INDIVIDUALLY BY FREQUENCY OF • 4 .
OCCURANCE AND ALPHABETICALLY
00*
'ALARM SERVICES RECORDED OU C.R. CARDS AND THrER
FREQUENCY
A.D.T.
135 N.E. 8 St.
Allright Ans. Service
Answerite Ans. Service
Dade Commonwealth Bld.
A-1 Answerphone Ans. Service
1627 Alton Rd. M.B.
Answerphone Ans. Service
7929 N.E. 1 Ave.
Bode Ans. Servic.e
7929 N.E. 1 Ave.
Burns Alert Alarm
4530 N.J. 7 Ave.
D&A Burglar Alarm Co. •
14122 A N.J. 27 Ave. 0pa Locka
Dade County Maintenance Dept.
Dade County, Fla.
Florida Security Systems
137 Aragon Ave. C.G.
Gray Security Systems
2424 S. Dixie o
Household Alarm Systems
2032 Scott, Hollywood
Kerpz Burglar Co.
5251 S.W. 5 St. Ft. Laud.
Miami Burglar Alarm Co.
2931 N.B. 2 Ave.
Plaza Ans. Service
102
1
8
1
26
1' .
•26
1
2
5
1
9
1
20
1
NUMBER OF BUS IrT1 S I1 U? TH t111I.113'11 OF ;IL 'RES
FROi1 EACH - 4 OR
BUSINESSES
1
1
1
•3
1
2
4
1
7
9
.g
17
7
22
29
35
48
197
•
CALLS BY EACH
38
30
29
26
21
20
18
17
14
12
11
10.
9
8
7
6
4
Total alarm calls from all businesses:.
% of total for above 197 of all businesses:
TOTAL
38
30
29
26
63
20
36
•68
14
84
99
80
153
56
154
174
175
192
1,491
2,•991
50%
Alarm calls represent 3.87, of all called for services
during the seven month period, excepting.traffico
i
a
a
Systems For Security 3 .
1177 Brickell Ave.
Systems self owned_ and operated • 2
Wackenhut
2550 N.W. 39 st.
11
The answering services recorded are not alarm systems per se.
They are a means by which some alarm service notifiesthe
police.
The multiple listing of alarm services by some businesses
reflects either the use of all at one time or the termination
of one and the acquisition ofanother during the seven month
period.
1•
•
- • , . •
I _ : • ♦ • • • • • .. ♦ a • ♦ ► ► • ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ► ► ► * ♦ ♦ ► ► *
"LI':!LE 710E
f7TA.. VA—I.3 E .UAT1J'1S: t2.1', . T ' I.,; q:, D?S_ •ViTI1)'.S'
I g T 13 5---,
3.P5957i
1,7r-.3550a2
♦**** _V7 DF J0B --- O7-5EP-79 - 12:L19:3B
,nf
---STD--DEv =- :31:-256.1:
MIAMI REVIEW
Afttf t/AILY RECORD
?tt
Published Deily except Saturday, Sunday 11,4
Legal Holidays
Miami, Dade County, Florida
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF DADE:
Before the undersigned authority personally
appeared Becky Caskey, who on oath says that she is
the Assistant Director of Legal Advertising of the
Miami Review and Daily Record, a daily (except
Saturday, Sunday and Legal Holidays) newspaper,
published at Miami in Dade County, Florida; that the
attached copy of advertisement, being a Legal
Advertisement or Notice in the matter of
CITY Q.F MIAM.I
Re.: O.r..di,nance...No......Q.9.96
, in the X X X X Court,
was published in said newspaper in the issues of
October 24, 1979
Affiant further says that the said Miami Review
and Daily Record is a newspaper published at Miami, in
said Dade County, Florida, and that the said newspaper
has heretofore been continuously published in said
Dade County, Florida, each day (except Saturday,
Sunday and Legal Holidays) and has been entered as
second class mail matter at the post office in Miami, in
said Dade County, Florida, for a period of one year next
preceding the first publication of the attached copy of
advertisement; and affiant further says that she has
neither paid nor promised any person, firm or
corporation any discount, rebate, commission or refund
for the pu pose of securing thi advertisement for
publicatlo• in the said newspa
Swo
24 day of OCL
Efii . • •.jpr
Notary ttep4tate of F,ibr' Large
(SEAL) ''''#, FIORIb "
My Commission expires Jd4,17i,jM„
MR-80
LEGAL NOTICE
All interested will take notice that on the 17th day at October, 1979,
the City Commission of Miami, Florida passed end adopted the follow-
ing titled ordinance:
•
ORDINANCE NO:1996
AN ORDINANCE ENTITLED :!BURGLARY AND ROBBERY
ALARM ORDINANCE"; PROVIDING DEFINITIONS; RE-
QUIRING ALARM USERS TO PARTIALLY COMPENSATE
THE CM, FOR UNNECESSARY RESPONSEr£.;BY THE
POLICE TO FALSE ALARMS, AND ALLOWINt4.JFQR AN
APPEA _ FROM A DETERMINA`fION 1 HATAN" ALARM
WAS ,ALSE; PROVIDING THE POLICE DEPARTMENT
WITH THE AUTHORITY t0 SUSPEND ITS RESPONSE TO
ALARM SYSTEMS THAT ACTIVATE A CERTAIN NUMBER
OF 'FALSE ALARMS, THEREBY CREATING THE
P1••:ESUMPTION THAT THE ALARM SYSTEM 15 MALFUNC-
-ri )ING; PROHIBITING THE INSTALLATION OR
(A'i..TENANCE OF ALL AUTOMATIC TELEPHONE
k -A RM DIALING DEVICES WHICH TRANSMIT OVER
Tl21_EPHONE LINES EXCLUSIVELY USED BY THE
PUBLIC TO REQUEST EMERGENCY SERVICE FROM THE
IPiA1AI POLICE DEPARTMENT; CONTAINING A
Rc'311ALER PROVISION AND A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE.
RALPH G. ONGIE
CITY CLERK
CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA •
Publics:Ion of this Notice on the 24 day of October 1979.
10/24 -4 M79-102426