Think something like this could ever happen around here?

[joetnymedic 43]

Duluth Considers Fees For Police, Fire Response

DULUTH, Minn. © (AP) ― Car accidents and house fires may soon cost Duluth residents more.

Duluth city administrators are considering charging property owners and drivers fees for police and fire responses.

Story

Edited July 20, 2008 by jack10562
Source Site Copyright Notice - EMTBravo Posting Policy

[SageVigiles 1,194]

I think it should happen for people who have repeat activated alarms due to poor maintenance or installation. We definitely have a candidate for that here in New Fairfield...

[Guest MVFD334]

Story

Town of Carmel already charges business owners (may also be residential) a fee for police responses to activated security alarms.

[DaRock98 76]

I think that is exactly what should be done in Westchester in my district we have a few places that would probably go out of business because of all the false alarms we go to.

[jack10562 414]

Many Municipalities have Alarm Permits with a schedule of fines for multiple/nuisance false alarms.

I see nothing wrong with them doing that, it creates an incentive for residents to maintain their alarm systems.

But as far as charging someone to put out a fire, that's plain nuts.

[Guest]

Being done now in Westport, CT.. MVA's and car fires on town roads and I-95 / Merritt Pkwy. Non residents insurance company recieves the bill for services. Westport residents not charged. Town has alarm ordinance for false alarms also.

[joetnymedic 43]

bill, I can agree with Wesports program but charging everyone including residents - I don't think that would fly. false alarms and out of area yeah but residents no

[Guest alsfirefighter]

Why should emergency services in some aspects be any different from any other municipal based services? If you want to stop crying funding you have to get innovative and knock off the ridiculousness. In some areas if you have extra garbage to pick up...you pay a fee. Have a refrigerator or other named items, you have to go pay first to then have it picked up by DPW. There are other innovative ways to get funding for staffing and/or equipment.

[ja3kfd 34]

I agree with it Bedford has a ordinance for alarms , and fines for false alarms. Plenty of Businesses have been taken to court for not paying fines etc.

Homeowners have same thing,

I can agree with billing on all MVA and the like,

do not charge residents,

I also know they can bill for all Haz MAt calls and they do not.

We have lost many sets of Turnouts and the like I feel it is not right to burden the Town Tax Base with anything that goes on with those types of calls. What ever can be re couped should be.

[abaduck 123]

Why should emergency services in some aspects be any different then any other municipal based services? If you want to stop crying funding you have to get innovative and knock off the ridiculousness. In some areas if you have extra garbage to pick up...you pay a fee. Have a refrigerator or other named items, you have to go pay first to then have it picked up by DPW. There are other innovative ways to get funding for staffing and/or equipment.

Well I guess the difference is, you can haul your own refrigerator, garbage etc., and it doesn't threaten anyones life, health, or property. Do you *really* want people weighing-up insurance (or lack of it) and the likely cost, before they decide to call us (or not to call us)? Do you want people to delay alarms while trying to extinguish the damn fire or extricate the damn victim themselves to save *money*?

The difference between fire/rescue and any other municipal based service is bloody obvious.

The logical endpoint of this kind of thinking would be private fire companies, private fire insurance - you don't GET a response unless you're already paid-up. Oooops, we've tried that already and abandoned it a long time ago...

Charging for repeated nuisance alarms, now THAT I can live with!

Mike

[x635 4,066]

If the PD that covers my mothers house is going to start charging for burglary alarms, I would at least hope they would walk around the house and check the doors and windows. I've seen a patrol officer from this department, on several occasions, pull up, not even get out of his car except to stick a citation in the mailbox. This is after a 20 minute response time for a very desnly populated area.

[Guest]

bill, I can agree with Wesports program but charging everyone including residents - I don't think that would fly. false alarms and out of area yeah but residents no

This was a give back to get additional firefighters on shift. It is aimed at non-residents as a user fee. The town residents are paying for our services through taxes, those just passing through that recieve our services should have to pay too. I don't like doing this, but I understand the towns point of view. I forgot to add the fee for the Fire Marshal's Office's review of plans and inspection services. This is the real money maker...

Bill D.

[Guest ECAFD3]

We already do pay its called taxes

[abaduck 123]

This was a give back to get additional firefighters on shift. It is aimed at non-residents as a user fee. The town residents are paying for our services through taxes, those just passing through that recieve our services should have to pay too. I don't like doing this, but I understand the towns point of view.

Well I'm sure you would understand my point of view - if WE have to pay when 'passing through' THERE, THEY should have to pay when passing through HERE - even if everyone else passing through here doesn't have to pay.

That's fair, surely - and anything else wouldn't be fair. It's reciprocal. Fair, but could get very complex. I don't think it's the way to go.

Mike

[gamewell45 258]

Good luck collecting money from some of the people. Some out of state drivers may not have insurance on their vehicles (I believe there are still some states where it is not a requirement that you have any insurance on your vehicle) and it would be interesting to see how they'd go about collecting it.

Automatic alarms is one thing; but charging for other services might become more of a headache then its worth in collecting the monies.

[Guest alsfirefighter]

Well I guess the difference is, you can haul your own refrigerator, garbage etc., and it doesn't threaten anyones life, health, or property. Do you *really* want people weighing-up insurance (or lack of it) and the likely cost, before they decide to call us (or not to call us)? Do you want people to delay alarms while trying to extinguish the damn fire or extricate the damn victim themselves to save *money*?

The difference between fire/rescue and any other municipal based service is bloody obvious.

The logical endpoint of this kind of thinking would be private fire companies, private fire insurance - you don't GET a response unless you're already paid-up. Oooops, we've tried that already and abandoned it a long time ago...

Charging for repeated nuisance alarms, now THAT I can live with!

Mike

First...santiation or lack of such can threaten life, health and property. Ask anyone who was living in NYC for the last major sanitation strike as the garbage piled up. More garbage equals more rodents and such which equals more disease. They have a job to do...we have a job to do. No different. We aren't above anyone else when it comes to having a job to do. It just so happens ours carries a little more risk then some of the others. What we do is special...it doesn't make us necessarily special or makes us owed anything from anybody.

Secondly, I have to let you off the hook Mike because I didn't clearly point out that I didn't mean for suppression activities. I'm talking more of other sources of funding. Add on's to permit fees soley for fire/ems, pump outs, things of that nature. There are constructive ways to find funding if people open their minds. (see my comment under the below quote)

Also AFA's are not nuisance alarms, they go off generally for a reason. For example, if an alarm activates due to burnt toast or food, that is a source of combustion and the detector did its job, it is not a false alarm, nuisance, etc. You cannot hold them accountable for that activation. So the billing for alarm activations is not always as efficient as it seems for the fire service.

We already do pay its called taxes

Yeah? So again..then why is it that DPW has fees for certain additional services or special services, PD's charge for reports and other services etc. Building departments charge additional fees for permits, inspections and so on. But for the good old fire service..."its taxes?" Have a dumpster that gets picked up by DPW...extra dumpster fee. If that's the case tell the people where I work to pay more, I need a raise and more staffing.

As far as burgler alarms...20 mins isn't actually all that bad in some cases. More and more departments categorize these as low priority, particularly busier ones who need units for active higher priority crimes. Sounds bad but just like the fire service, very few security system alarms/panic alarms are actual incidents.

[Bnechis 3,961]

Well I guess the difference is, you can haul your own refrigerator, garbage etc., and it doesn't threaten anyones life, health, or property. Do you *really* want people weighing-up insurance (or lack of it) and the likely cost, before they decide to call us (or not to call us)? Do you want people to delay alarms while trying to extinguish the damn fire or extricate the damn victim themselves to save *money*?

The difference between fire/rescue and any other municipal based service is bloody obvious.

The logical endpoint of this kind of thinking would be private fire companies, private fire insurance - you don't GET a response unless you're already paid-up. Oooops, we've tried that already and abandoned it a long time ago...

Charging for repeated nuisance alarms, now THAT I can live with!

Mike

Most homeowners and commercial insurance policies already charge the property owner a fee, to be able to pay the FD for "Salvage" and "Overhaul" services. Since 99.9% of FD's dont bill for it, the insurance companies keep the money. Same goes for extrication and MVA fluid spills (Hazmat).

And for all Hazmat...not just the nasty stuff... Federal Law (Sara Title III) requires that the spiller pays 100% of all costs associated with the spill.