D
Derek Ollom
- Jan 1, 1970
- 0
Does anyone know more about the City of Seattle requiring alarm companies to
get licensed in the City?
get licensed in the City?
a good understanding of the realities of the Alarm Industry. This is a stepI hadn't previously seen this Act, but damn, I'd say the City of Seatle has
Robert L. Bass said:What!?! You can't go around posting stuff like that in this forum. :^)
Only kidding, Jack.
There may be a constitutional problem with placing the onus of collecting
fees upon a contractor located outside the local jurisdiction. I'm not sure
but this might be prohibited by Quill v. North Dakota. While that case had
to do with collection of sales taxes rather than fines or fees, the
situation is somewhat similar. Out of state companies are forced to act as
the agents of local governments where they have no physical presence. It
would be interesting if one of the big players decided to fight this
ordinance in federal court.
That is why you see the kind of trash most of the ASA Taliban post.
Actually, NH is a beautiful place all year round. Of course it helps if you
like skiing.
AlarmReview said:I recently met with an owner of an alarmco from LA who admitted that if
municipal response was taken away, it would severely crimp his ability to sell
monitored alarms. He admitted that they never gave it a second thought that
what was really being sold wasn't notification of an alarm but police response
to that alarm. Fortunately, he's moving towards alarm response.
That's the point I've heard from police executives. If the alarm companies are
selling a service that the police have to deliver, the police should have the
right to participate in that business relationship by setting their rate for
service and/or standards for the delivery of that service. I know some will
say they should be providing that service as a matter of government
responsibilities, but I've never heard any department with or without response
say they would ever charge if the alarm was real. They are only charging for
the false ones.
If you look at all the levels of ordinances from permits to fines to
non-response, seems all the steps from the bottom up have been tried with
little success, so the logical step, just short of non-response, is pay as you
go. I bet the 900 number dispatch looks pretty good now compared to what's now
been proposed and implemented.