Got a letter from the police today

[GunGeezer]

I received a letter in this mornings mail from the St. Petersburg police dept. stating that the City Council passed a resolution requiring residents who have alarm systems to pay a $15.00 start-up fee and a $10.00 annual fee or face large penalties for not reporting active alarm systems.

I can see assessing some sort of fine for nuisance false alarms, but one would think responding to a real alarm in progress would make the job of the police easier than after the fact. Also, the last time I looked, I was paying a pretty hefty tax for police protection with or without an alarm system.

There was no explanation for the rationale for the new fee. It doesn't even sound as if it is legal and not discriminatory, not to mention taxation without representation.

I'm going to look into hiring Blackwater to protect my property as it might be cheaper than the new tax on a tax. What a country?

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[SAMI]

Ridiculous!

[Der Alte]

If you only knew how many false alarms with home systems they have to respond to you would probably think differently.

[jjkjr]

If you only knew how many false alarms with home systems they have to respond to you would probably think differently.

+1 it is an eye opening......... way to many, could be why you cant get a cop when you need them they are responding to false alarms. just a thought.

[Jcabin]

There was no explanation for the rationale for the new fee. It doesn't even sound as if it is legal and not discriminatory, not to mention taxation without representation.

Sorry bro, YOU FAIL. This is obviously a local ordinance that was passed by your commissioners or township. You could have attended these meetings, you could have voiced your opinion, you could have had the vote turned down by letting your ELECTED officials hear you and your fellow citizens.

instead you choose to do nothing, and then ***** and moan about it.
"it's taxation without representation man, hahha" Yeah, who's the one laughing?

[Tmag]

Just when you thought it was safe to bend over the bureaucrats find a new way to drive it home, it’s just ludicrous

[Guns and more]

If you only knew how many false alarms with home systems they have to respond to you would probably think differently.

So why not make it a fine for a false alarm? Let the users pay.
We all know what this is. It's a tax on those who can afford an alarm.
I'd venture to say the St. Pete police spend a greater portion of their time in South St. Pete, where no one has an alarm. (and crime is rampant.)
How about a tax on those people?

[pelletm]

I had 2 false alarms on my system in Manatee County. First one was free and the second there was a fine associated with it. Fairly steep from what I recall. Both false alarms turned out to be equipment so I called to explain. The fellow I talked to at the Sheriffs Dept was really nice about it and told me to get a letter from the monitoring company saying it was their fault. What he said was that it would reset the clock on my violations. I thought it was fair.

[SIXTO]

I agree, I don't like paying more to the Gub'ment than I have too. But, alarm systems are more of a PIA to police than they are a help. Let me explain;

First, most monitoring companies are horrible at their jobs. It might take them 20 minutes or longer to call the police. Then add response times... you get the picture.
Second, by a large margin, the alarms police respond to are false. That takes a ton of time and manpower off the hands of a police department.
Third, try getting a hold of a homeowner when their alarm is wailing at 3am and they are out of town. Or, the alarm goes off because the owner left a door open, the cat out or the A/C is blowing the kids birthday balloons around. Again, the police have to either find a way to secure your home, or wait around until the owner shows up. That is very time consuming.

Maybe, just maybe, these fee's are a administrative fee that will allow them to collect some contact information such as cell phone numbers or maybe a trusted neighbor that can secure your home or shut off the alarm that is waking the dead if you are out of town. Or lets say your home really was broke into. Time is crucial to get you back so you can tell the police what is missing. For ten bucks a year, I'd say that is a bargain.



But please do explain the taxation without representation comment... I don't see it.

[cvhoss]

I've had a professional alarm system (no ADT) in my business for over 20 years. While we have very few false alarms, they do happen. I really don't see $10.00 a year to be an unreasonable cost associated with an alarm system. That's probably only a small fraction of what you pay for monitoring fees and all they have to do is place a phone call to the police. If your city wanted to charge you $50.00 a month, that would be one thing but $10.00 a year?

And as someone else already pointed out, since your elected officials passed the ordinance, it most definitely isn't taxation without representation. As far as already paying for protection, I pay a pretty hefty tax bill every year but if I have to call the county ambulance service, they still send me a bill for $1500.00.

Hoss

[mcp1810]

My old department responded to an average of ( I think it was) 100,000 alarm calls per year. Of those about 1% turned out to be actual or attempted break ins. One of the things that annoyed me to no end was the fact that the alarm companies were taking in literally millions of dollars for "our" work. As a resident of the county I worked for it really ticked me off when I thought about how many man hours, how much gasoline, wear and tear on the cruisers etc. my taxes were paying for to answer those false alarms. Alarm calls accounted for almost 1/8 of our calls for service. And each of those calls were responded to by two officers.
Think about that. If those numbers were typical across the country one sixth or so of you police department is essentially working for the alarm companies at no cost to the alarm companies. The taxpayers are footing the bill for that.
Until the alarm companies start having their own employees respond to check on alarms, and then calling the police only for verified break ins, I have no problem with alarm permits and fees.

[Guns and more]

I have no problem with alarm permits and fees.

You are missing the point!
Why should I pay a tax for something I don't use.
If my alarm never has a false signal, why am I being charged?
Charge by the false alarms, not by taxing everyone.

It's like the police saying, "We have to arrest crack dealers, so we're charging grandmothers for our time. NO, NO, NO!

This St. Pete thing is nothing more than a money grab, and I'll bet the money won't go to the police anyway.

[SIXTO]

You might use it. You pay for police and fire, schools etc. All that stuff you might not use, but you see the need to pay for it, right?

Anyway, your questions are probably better asked at the next city council meeting.

[ImaShepardRU]

First they register cars.
Then they register boats.
Then they register airplanes.
Then they even register guns.
Now they want to register alarms.
What next, will they want to register people.
Wait, they already do that!

[BigStick]

In our city, the first false alarm is free, the second is $50 and the third and following are more. This seems to make sense to me, but I would be upset about a blanket fee for having an alarm.

How about this. Guns cause injuries that hospitals have to pay for since the thugs don't have insurrance (yet - thanks a lot Obama Ried and Pelosi ) So we should charge a fee to all gun owners to pay for the negligence of those who get shot. I know it's not a perfect analogy, but you get the idea. Charging a fee for something that might happen is just another tax on the people.