HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Report - August 19, 1992 (110)k
CITY OF LODI COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
AGNSJ1 TITLE: City-ffioaitored Silent Alarm system
NXWrZW DATE: .August 19, 1992
PREPA749n )3Y: City Manager
ACTION: That the City council direct staff to discontinue the
City-monitor&4 silent alarm service.
BACKOPAMM INFORNA=ON: This item has appeared on previous city council
agendas of March 4, 1991 and August 5, 1992. Copies
of those council Ccamunications and appropriate
exhibits are attached (Exhibit A).
At its lamt regular meeting, the City Council reviewed the results of a survey
of the business aattssuaity conducted by the police Department. Mr. David Rice,
owner of Sitterman's Jewelry, 10 N. School Street, who "minted in the
davalcpeent of the survey form, wan present at that meeting and requested more
time to personally caatwct those businesses that did not respond to the aurvey.
Police Captains Larry Hansen will be in attendance to assist in the
presentations. Mr. Rice will oe apprised that this item appears on this agenda.
FUNDIMR: Noes required
At tacbmen t
CCCCN575/TXTA.07A
APPROVED:
Respectfully submitted,
Thoa+as A. Peteram
City Manager
THOMAS A PETERSON
City Managw
r cyctW Pow
� CITY OF LODI
COUNCIL
NICATION
AQZN L TTS: Discuss City -Monitored Silent Alarm, Service
MIXTING DATE: August 5, 1992
i
PRRPARM BY: city Manager
R800NNEIMED ACTION: That the City Council direct staff to discontinue the
City -monitored silent alarm service.
BACXBROUND 110%naa ION: At its regular meeting of Wednesday, March. 4., 1992
the City Council received a report from staff
requesting that the Council concur in the action of
staff to discontinue the silent alarm service monitored by the Police
Department. Attached (Exhibit A) is a copy of the Council Cocminication of
that date which addressee this matter. Nothing has occurred since then to
alter the information and position presented in that report.
At the March ! meeting, following a lengthy discussion, the City Council
directed staff to survey the business community to determine the level of
interest. The survey form was developed with the assistance of Mr. David Rice,
owner of Bitterman's Jewlers, i.Q N. School Street. Mx. Rice has been the
leading proponent of the City of Lodi remaining in the business of monitoring a
silerst alarm service. The survey form was mailed, with a self-addressed return
emrelope, to 228 businesses. Of this number, only 25 indicated an interest in
subscribing to such a service, although at this time we do not know the costs
to individual businesses. It is interesting to note that not a single bank or
savings and loan institution expressed an interest in sudh a service.
Bitterman's Jewelers was the only jewelry store in the City expressing
interest. Police Captain Larry Hansen coordinated the survey and a copy of his
cao+pilation of the results is also attached (Exhibit B). He rill be in
attendance at Wednesday night's meeting to answer m y questions Councilmembers
may have.
I is the staff's position that the CityIa remaining alarms can be adequately
served by a private alarm caniparsy or by an a]ternate method thereby eliminating
the need for the alarm panel as it presently exists or its replacement.
PC ING . Worse required
TAP.br
Attachments
CCC0W561/TXTA.07A
APPROVED
Re"ctfully submitted,
—4a.16qrP.
City Manager
THOMAS A PETERSON
city mona9w
A
,.Cyc1.6 o,Q..
CC -i
11
9W
CITY OF LODI COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
AGENDA TITLE: Discontinue Silent Alarm Service Monitored by Police Department
MEETING DATE: March 4 1992
PREPARED BY: City Manrger
RECOMMEKDED ACTION: That the City Council concur in the actfon of staff to
discontinue the silent alarm service monitored by the
Police Department.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Last summer the City Council was ddvised via a
memorandum that it was the City's intention to
terminate the silent alarm service monitored by the
Police Department. That memo advised that "unless I
(City Manager) hear from Councilmembers to the
contrary, we will move ahead with this effort...." A
second mew was sent to the City Council last November referencing the earlier
memo and stating that "we are now ready to do so (terminate) an 6 will proceed as
planned."
The Police Department, in a letter dated January 3, 1992, advised the 28
subscribers to this service that the department would no longer maintain the
silent alarm board. The letter gave a disconnect deadline of February 6, 1992.
with a provision for a 30 -day extension from that date if the time frame created
a hardship. This deadline was subsequently extended an additional 30 days to
April 6, 1992. Two months have elapsed since the notification letter was mailed
and as of this writing the Police Department has received just two calls of
complaint. One complainant was unhappy initially, but understood the reasons
for the action. He wasgranted a 30 -day extension and advised the Police
Department that he was moving ahead with addressing his silent alarm needs. The
only other complaint was received from Nr. David P.4ce, owner of Bitterman's
Jewelry. 10 N. School Street, who appeared before the City Council at its
regular meeting of Wednesday, January 15, 1992, to present his protest in
person.
There are a small number of City and County work stations and equipment rooms
connected to the system and the dispatchers will continue to monitor those until
the system completely "crashes." Over half of these are located in the Public
Safety Building (Police Department) itself. These alarms are almost never
activated and thus pose little, if any, additional load on the dispatchers.
Upon the complete failure of the existing alarm system, the City will evaluate
alarm system technologies at that time and recommend action as deemed
appropriate.
APPROVED
MOMAS A PETERSON
C.ty Mon. -Igor
a�
rJ
—7-0 Car*,
CC r
a i
A
I
AGENDA TITLE: Discontinue Silent Alarm Service Monitored by Poliet Department
MEETING DATE: March 4 1992
Page Two
The reasons for the decision to terminate this service were :enumerated in the
original memo distributed to the City Council. They bear repeatin§:
. It has been determined that this silent alarm board operation is obsolete.
. The system has become periodically unreliable, and we are experiencing
problems and an increasing difficulty in locating parts.
. We have created a false sense of security for those businesses currently
tied into the system.
. There exists the potential of City liability and as a result, the
majority of California cities no longer provide this service.
. There are a number of local alarm companies available to provide this
service.
As a direct result of Mr. Rice's requests for additional informaltion, proposals to
install a replacement system were solicited from four private alarm companies. Two
wire Lodi firms; one in Stockton; and one in the Bay Area (San Mateo). The bids
ranged widely from a low of $14,800 to a high of 644.649. The range would lead one
to logically conclude that the various equipment proposed also varied widely in
capabilities.
The issue here is not whether a silent alarm system can be installed at a cost of
$14,000 or $44,000. The issue is: should the City of Lodi re4dain in the silent
alarm business? It is the recommendation of staff that the City should not. The
Dispatch Center is already crowded with calls for service, many of which are of an
emergency nature, and some of which bear directly on the life safety of the officers
involved. In the midst of this activity, the City's disnatchers should not be
saddled with the additional burden of having to prioritize responses to silent
alarms. The department has always, and will continue to respond to silent alarms.
But the screening of these alarms should be the responsibility of private alarm
companies who are in the business of providing this kind of service. The fact that
approximately 90%-95% of the silent alarm calls the Police Department receives are
"false alarms" lends further support to the City's termination of this service. It
is important to note that there remains in San Joaquin County not a single other law
enforcement agency still in the silent alarm business.
am
AGENDA TITLE:
MEETING DATE:
P&ge Three
Discontinue Silent Alarm Service Monitored by
March 4 1992
1
I
Police Department
Finally, there are significant numbers of previous subscribers � the se w i ce who
have already made arrangenpnts to convert their alarm systems to private alarm
companies. They have done so at no small expense. It has cost them money. For
example, all of the banks and savings and loan institutions are no longer connected
to the City's silent alarm board. With the exception of Mr. Rice, the City has not
heard from any of the remaining handful of businesses and residents who had
previously subscribed to this service. Having received no inquiries from these
individuals in the two months since the original contact regarding the termination
of service was made. we can only assume that they have either made other
arrangements or have concluded they have no continued need for alarm services.
To now renege on the City's -prior announcement that it would be terminating this
sewi ce would be most unfair to those businesses and residents who have taken the
City at its word.
FUNDING: None required
Respectfully submitted,
Thomas A Peterson
City Manager
TAP :br
CCCOM443/TXTA.07A
L O D I P O L I C E D E PAOI� T M E N T
EXMH T
M e m o r a n d u m
To: Thomas Peterson
City Manaqer
From: Captain Larry D. Hansen
Patrol Division Commander
Date: July 27, 1992
Subject: BUSINESS ALARM SURVEY
On June 24. 1992 the alarm monitoring survey was mailed to 228
city businesses. The following results were noted:
1. 37 surveys were returned (unopened) with no forwarding address
2. 191 surveys were assumed to be delivered
3. 57 (of 191) responses were completed and returned to Lodi
Police Department
4. This is a survey return rate of 30%
5. Of the 191 businesses who received the survey, 25 (or 13%)
indicated they would like to be connected to Lodi Police
Department
Included with this memo are the business alarm survey results,
with the following attachments:
A. Businesses intarayted in connectinq to the alarm system
B. Businesses Aot interested in connecting to the alarm system
C. Current alarm subscribers (a Cota,l of 9)
D. City alarms
Based on the results of this survey, it is my recommendation that
the City of Lodi discontinue the alarm monitoring service. I have
consulted with a private alarm company and they have determined
they could monitor all city alarms, thus relieving us of the alarm
monitori.-,g business. However, Lodi Police Department Dispatch
could continue to monitor our existing "panic buttons'.
l believe the results of the survey offer an interesting profile
of the businesses in our community. I would refer you to the
summary of the survey results for any further analysis.
Respectfully submitted,
Cao ainarry 16.1 Hansen
Patrol Division Commander
LDH: j h
.BUSINESS ALARM SURVEY RES4 a
1. Business name: (Addresses listed on Attachments A & g):
Interested in System (A) Not Interested in System (B)
Poser's TV and Radio
Apache Armory
Bitterman's Jewelers
Nick's Gun Works
Al's Wheel & Brake
Lodi Coin & Precious Metals
Midas Muffler and Brake
Lodi Sporting Goods
Sak's TV and Home Furnishings
Lodi Funeral Home
Robinsons Western Store
Baumbach and Piazza
Star Market #1
Air Pacific Compressors, T_rc.
VariPro System
Gannon Trucking
M 6 R Company
Radio Plus
Jack in the Box
Dependable Precision
Lodi Warehouse Distributors
Ag Industrial Mfg., Inc.
Guarantee Repair Service
Star Market #2
Ehler's Auto
2. Type of business:
(See Attachments A and B)
3. Identify your risk concern:
King Videocable
Longs Drug Stores #48
Danz Jewelers
Burtons Shoes
Valley Ind.
Plaza Liquors #2
Newman 6 Ramsey Insurance
Country Kitchen
Lodi Video Station
Doors Plus, Inc.
Christensens Fashions
Cherokee Auto Body
Lodi Fab Industries
Bello Cabinets
Lodi Fisco
Stan's Business Machines
E & L Market
Farmers 6 Merchants Bank
Dobler's Ski Cottage
Wright Insurance Agency
Michele's Antiques
Hollywood Cafe
Lodi Metal ' Bch. , Inc.
The Toggery
Wallace Comp. er Services
San Joaquin Vc:. Clinic
Allied Disc Grinding
Ming's Smorgi Restaurant -
Radio Shack
Great Adventures
Lodi Tent & Awning
Bank of Lodi
High Risk:
Expensive inventory - easily carried away 17
Moderate Risk:
Moderate to expensive inventory - easy
to difficult to carry away 27
Low Risk:
Low to medium price inventory - easy
to difficult to carry away 13
57
30%
47t
23%
100%
I
Surve Results ?—
Page
t
4. Describe your concerns for employee safety:
Four respondents expressed concern about employee safety.
Eleven respondents expressed concern about robbery.
5. Type of your existing alarm system:
A. Silent 3 5%
B. Audible 10 18%
C. Silent 6 Audible 43 75%
D. None . 1 2%
57 1001L
6. Does anyone monitor your alarm system?
YES 53 93t
NO 4 7%
7. Please identify who monitors your system.
Bay Alarm
16
American Alarm Electronics
12
Alamo
5
Lodi Police Dept.
4
Sonitrol
3
No Response
3
Lodi Security System
3
Valley Alarm
2
ADT
2
None
1
The neighbors do
1
Honeywell Protection
1
Tandy Security System
1
Centurion Alarm
1
The System Alarm Co.
1
Advanced Alarm Technology
1
8. Do you own your alarm system?
YES 33 58%
NO 22 330
NO RESPONSE 2 4%
57 100%
28%
21%
9%
i
3%
21
2%
20%
2%
28
57 100%
- Survey Results r
Page 3 '
9. Is your system serviced by an alarm company?
i
YES 50 88%
NO 6 108
NO RESPONSE 1 2%
57 1008
10. Do you have an alarm service contract with your alarm company?
YES 43 75%
NO 13 23%
NO RESPONSE 1 2%
57 1008
11. Do you have a current r.�onitoringimaintenance agreement with
your alarm company ?
YES 41 82%
NO 10 18%
NO RESPONSE 0 0%
51 100%
12. Do you have a current agreement for response time?
YES 14 24%
NO 42 74%
NO RESPONSE 1 2%
13.
51 100%
Do you have an agreement with your alarm company to call you
before the Lodi Police Department is called?
YES 21 378 '
NO 32 56%
NO RESPONSE 2 3.58
YES AND NO 2 3.50
57 1008
Comments:
1. Police called first
2. We have good reason on several occasions
3. Call police first I
4. They call both depending on extenti
of break n
5. When select zones are activated and during normal
working hours
Survey Results
on
a monthly basis?
Page 4
33
580
b. .5 a month
5
9%
14. M a t is your estimate of
how .many "employee error' type
alarms you have on
a monthly basis?
a. None
32
56%
b. .5 a month
6
10%
C. 1 a month
6
10%
d. 1-2 per year
10
18%
e. 5 a month
1
2%
f. No Response
2
4%
15. What is your estimate of how many "equipment mall unction"
type alarms you have
on
a monthly basis?
a. None
33
580
b. .5 a month
5
9%
C'1 a month
4
7%
d. 1-2 per year
11
19%
e. 5 a month
1
2%
f. No Response
3
5%
57 100%
16. H w many burglaries, unauthorized entires, and w 'idalisms
have you had in the past year?
a. None 41 72%
b. 1 Par Year 6 110
C. 2-4 3 5%
d. 5-8 4 7%
e. 12-15 2 3%
f. No Response 1 2%
57 100%
I
17. Do you use special pass codes with your alarm company?
YES 43 76%
NO 11 19%
NO RESPONSE 3 5%
57 100%
iS. Do you have an alarm permit issued by the City?
YES 40 70%
NO 10 18%
NO RESPONSE 7 12%
57 100%
Survey Results
Page 5
1
19. Would you be interested in connecting to an alarm Isystem
monitored by the Lodi. Police Department at a cost to be
determined?
rnmmPnt c
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
10)
11)
12)
YES 25 448
NO 29 510
NO RESPONSE 3 5%
57 100%
Mildly interested
If no other service is needed
If cost is reasonable
Perhaps, if more prompt response could be assired
Corporation would not sanction
Possibly, we're fairly happy with our current setup.
Low cost L interest.
Not if I have to maintain a secondary system
Unless the cost is less than I pay now
Too many business casts now
Would be too much money
I feel that the private companies can and are doing a
great job
I do not feel that our police department should have to
service private businesses when other means are available
20. If it were possible for you to connect to an alarm system
monitored by the Lodi Police Department, would you be willing
to establish a system that is also simultaneously monitored
by a private alarm company?
YES 24 42%
NO 24 420
NO RESPONSE 3 140
MAYBE 1 2
57 100%
NOTE: Of the 25 respondents who said they would like to be
connec-ted to LPD, 3 said they were not willing to establish a
separate s{/stem and 1 said maybe. Of the 29 respondents who
said they would not like to be connected to LPD, 3 said they
were willing to establish a separate system.
CorLments
1)
2)
3)
4)
Not unless you think it is necessary
Perhaps, 11 a more prompt response time could be assured
Already done
We c ui,rent ly have such � system
Survey Results ■
Page 6
5) If confusion as to responsibility was eliminated between
the two services
6) Maybe
7) If the cost was not too high, and the city police
department recommended them as a reliable service
8) In existence at our business now
9) Possibly, depends on cost involved
10) Already monitored by private alarm company
11) Depends on cost
12) Perhaps, if it were a free service
13) I would not be willing to pay the additional cost
involved as my private system has been adequate for 9
years
14) If no charges were incurred
21. Are you currently satisfied with your present alarzh company?
YES 47 82%
NO 6 110
NO RESPONSE 4 79-
57 100%
['nrrtman t a
1) Not completely - the time taken to notify poli=e of alarm
is not consistently fast enough
2) Lodi Police Department is solely responsible fbr`our
alarm monitoring
3) Not applicable, Lodi Police Department only mohitors
alarm
4) I :,)uld feel safer if we were monitored by our police
del lrtment
5) Since I got rid of my other alarm company, I hiven't had
an;, problems, w-.th the other company, I was robbed 3 times
22. Does your present alarm company offer guards or contract
service personnel to secure your premises in the event of
window Smash/burglary at your business?
YES 7 12%
NO 40 70%
NO RESPONSE 10 18%
57 100%
['r,m dm T1 t a
1) They will arrange to provide this service at aiditionai
cost
2) Not sure
3) Not sure
4) Not that I know of
51 very interested In direct police monitorany
Survey Results "-
Page 7
6) Not applicable
7) Not sure
8) Unknown
9) Not applicable guard store
10) Damage is covered and repaired, and employee g
11) Unknown
12) Unknown
13) Unknown
14) Unknown
15) We are required to secure alarm after each alarm condition
ATTACHMENT A
BUSINESSES INTERESTED IN CONNtCTING
TO AN ALARM SYSTEM MONITORED BY LPD
(Page 1 of 2)
Poser's TV and Radio
208 S. School Street
Apache Armory
920 S. Cherokee Lane WF
Bitterman's Jewelers
10 N. School Street
Nick's Gun Works
440 E. Lodi Avenue
Al's Wheel 6 Drake
334 E. Lockeford Street
Lodi Coin 6 Precious Metals
105 W. Walnut Street
Midas Muffler and Brake
325 E. Kettleman Lane
Lodi Sporting Goods
858 W. Kettleman Lane
Sak's TV and Home Furnishings
200 N. Sacramento - Service Dept.
Sak's Thi and Home Furnishings
210 W. Pine Street - Sales Dept.
Lodi Funeral Home
725 S. Fairmont Avenue
Robinsons Western Store
141 E. Lodi Avenue
Baumbach and Piazza
323 W. Elm Street
Star Market 11
741 S. Cherokee Lane
Air Pacific Compressors, Inc.
626 N. Sacramento Street
VariPro System
711 N. Sacramento Street
io
BUSINESSES INTERESTED IN CONNECTING
TO AN ALARM SYSTEM MONITORED BY LPD
(Page 2 of 2)
Gannon Trucking
1123 E. Vine Street
M & R Company
33 E. •Tokay Street
Radio Plus
335 E. Kettleman Lane
Jack in the Box
419 W. Lodi Avenue
Dependable Precision
1111 S. Stockton Street
Lodi Warehouse Distributors
320 E. Lockeford Street
Ag Industrial Manufacturing, Inc.
110 S. Beckman Road
Guarantee Repair Service
101 Commerce Street
Star Market t2
2525 S. Hutchins Street
Ehler' s Auto
217 N. Sacramento Street
ATTACHMENT B
BUSINESSES NOT INTERESTED IN CONNECTING
TO AN ALAW SYSTEM MONITORED BY LPD
(Page 1 of 2)
King Videocable
1521 S. Stockton Street
Longs Drug Stores #48
100 W Lodi Avenue
Danz Jewelers
220 S. School Street
Burtons Shoes
17 W. Pine Street
Valley Ind.
1313 S. Stockton Street
Plaza Liquors #2
2420 W. Turner Road
Newman & Ramsey Insurance
402 W. Pine Street
Country Kitchen
3327 W. Lockeford Street
Lodi Video Station
550 S. Cherokee Lane #A
Doors Plus, Inc.
314 N. Main Street
Christensens Fashions
5 N. School Street
Cherokee Auto Body
314 N. Cherokee Lane
Lodi Fah Industries
1029 S. Sacramento Street
Bello Cabinets
1109 Black Diamond Way
Lodi Fisco
1150 Victor Road
Stan's 4ua1ity Business Machines
469 Murray
n
BUSINESSES NOT INTERESTED IN CONNECTING!
TO AN ALARM SYSTEM MONITORED BY LPD
(Page 2 of 2)
E & L Market
844 S. Central Avenue
Fanners & Merchants Bank
121 W. Pine Street
Dobler's Ski Cottage
545 W. Lockeford Street
Wright Insurance Agency
2100 W. Kettleman Lane
Michele's Antiques
15 N. Cherokee Lane
H.31lywood Cafe
315 S. Cherokee Lane
Lodi Metal Tech., Inc.
213 S. Kelly Street
The Toggery
28 S. School Street
Wallace Computer Services
1831 S. Stockton Street
San Joaquin Veterinary Clinic
523 W. Harney Lane
Allied Disc Grinding, Inc.
1003 E. Vine Street
Ming's Smorgi Restaurant
1040 W. Kettleman Lane
Radio Shack
230 W. Kettleman Lane
Great Adventures Travel
605 W. Kettleman Lane
Lodi Tent 6 Awning Co., Inc.
1617 Ackerman
Bank of Lodi
701 S. Han Lane
ATTACHMENT C
CURRENT ALARM SUBSCRIBERS
09
Posers TV and Radio
208 S. School Street
10
Apache Gun Works
920 S. Cherokee Lane
21
Bitterman's Jewelers
10 N. School Street
36
Nick's Gun Shop
440 E. Lodi Avenue
51
Al's Wheel 6 Brake
334 E. Lockeford Street
Lodi. Coin & Precious Metals
105W. Walnut Street
13
Ehlers Garage
217 N. Sacramento Street
28
Beckman Residence
107 N. Avena
31
Big 0 Tires
302 N. Cherokee Lane
38
Borelli Jewelers
9 N. School Street
ZONE#
01
02
05
07
12
14
15
22
24
26
27
40
48
52
54
ATTACHMENT D
CITY ALARMS
ALARM/ LOCAT ION
Water Flow Alarm
Police Basement
Smoke Alarm/Prone
Computer Area
Heat Alarm
Generator Room
Criminal Court
Boiler Room Diesel
Police Department
Sewer Pit Pump
Police Basement
Computer Room Alarm
City Hall
Panic Alarm
Carnegie Forum
Judge - LMC Deparkmert
City Hall Finance
City Manager
Panic Button
Jail Smoke Alarm
Gasoline Sump
Generator Room
Court - Department 2
Burglar Alarm
Carnegie Forum
District Attorney
Lodi Office