1978 ORD NO. 1549 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

0 141 9 10 11 12 Itrol of the possessor, whether such causes are sole or in combination: (1) More than two within any thirty -day period; or (2) More than four within any ninety day period; or (3) More than six within any 180 -day period; or (4) More than eight within any one-year period. Section 9.30.060. Reimbursement to City for False Alarm Costs. a. Whenever the Police Department has responded to a false alarm which is in excess of any of the tolerable numbers according to the criteria set forth in Subsection (b) of 'Section 9.30.050, and whenever the Police Department has responded to any alarm sound, signal or message omitted or transmitted from or by an alarm system, proprietor alarm or audible alarm, the Police Chief shall compute the costs p o is directly and indirectly incurred by his Department and any 1311 other Department of the City. This cost will be based upon one (1) hour for each 14 (employee responding to such false alarm for any hour or fraction of one hour. I 15 'Cost will be computed by using the Current "E" Step of a Police Officer's hourly 3.16wage of the Police Department, or other City Department employee, responding to 7 such false alarm. The Chief of Police shall promptly transmit a report of such 1costs`.to the City Manager, together with an appropriate report relating the facts 19 land circumstances concerning the incident to which the report of costs relates. 20 b. The City Manager shall review the reports and unless he deter - 21 ,mines that exigencies of the facts and circumstances show the incident to be ex - 22 cusable or that for any other reason it would not be in the public interest to I 23 !pursue this reimbursement procedure, he shall cause billings, for the total costs 24 !as reported by the Police Chief, or for such lesser portion thereof, as he deter - 25 (mines is reasonable in view of the surrounding circumstances, to be mailed or 26" otherwise transmitted to all of the following or as many thereof appropriately 27 jilas shown to be involved in connection with the particular incident and with the 28 ialarm system thereby involved: