Sandy Springs got it right with “SR-Subsidy Recovery”. Based on the experience of monitoring companies in other cities with SR, like Seattle, monitoring companies will not “get fined out of business”. All stakeholders will win, including customers. SR simply modernizes the public/private relationship (false alarm issues); and it is already street tested and court tested. Even the IACP/ International Association of Chiefs of Police lists SR and VR (Verified Response) as management tools for managing the public/private relationship. Because….
All calls for police response to private alarm systems are called by licensed monitoring firms, not called by the customer alarm site. Nearly all those calls for help are considered “nuisance calls” from deterrent systems, not qualified for emergency police response. Emergency response generally requires witness (key word) to a 911 type emergency, not response to unknown motion sensors that are false/unnecessary over 98% of the calls (8-18% of police budgets). Licensed monitoring firms control the entire matter.... they know the basic 911 rules and protocol, but historically choose to “bend the rules”. Knowing nearly all calls are unnecessary, under SR, monitoring firms simply do not call for help (historically over 50% reduction quickly). They simply accept the nuisance standards for delayed or no response. But if they want/need emergency response for any reason, they call, they get, they pay the service fee if false. It becomes a matter of disclosure to their customers, and it modernizes the business model for all parties. The industry standard Model Ordinance is outdated and trending out, whereas SR and VR are trending in.