Loading...
04/03/1991 APPEAL TO FALSE ALARM CITATION by K.K. SMITH & SONS, INC. April 3, 1991 10:00 A.M. Present: Elizabeth Deptula, Assistant City Manager Norris Smith, Representing K.K. Smith & Sons Milton A. Galbraith, Jr., City Attorney Charlie Dunn, Police Officer Cynthia E. Goudeau, City Clerk Ms. Deptula called the meeting to order at 10:01 A.M. Norris Smith filed an appeal of a false alarm citation on behalf of K.K. Smith & Sons, Inc. located at 409 Cleveland Street. Mr. Smith indicated they were having problems with the system, and he submitted dated service reports from ADT Security Systems. He said there were line problems as this is a digital system. He stated the problem started on February 20th and he started keeping records of the communications failures. Jim Flisick, an ADT technician, could not find the problem; everything was replaced and there were still false alarms. He stated he continued to keep records of the problems, and ADT informed him it was a line problem. He said the problem was solved on March 25th. He did not feel he should be cited for false alarms as the problems were not within his control. Charlie Dunn, Police Officer, indicated the ordinance states mechanical or human problems are still the alarm owners responsibility. He stated he has contacted GTE (General Telephone) and received a computer printout. He stated the first time the phone company was contacted was March 7th, and they indicated there were no line problems. They were out again on March 21st, and there were still no line problems. He reported that Norm Rowley, of GTE, was suppose to meet with Mr. Smith and ADT on March 26th, but ADT canceled that appointment. He stated according to GTE it was not a phone line problem as ADT indicated. Mr. Smith stated it seemed GTE and ADT were trying to blame each other. He stated due to the business being a jewelry store, they have to have a triple A rated alarm system and ADT is the only company that carries this. He stated he could only go by what ADT told him. The City Attorney reviewed the code referencing the appeal system, and stated a written decision would be submitted within ten days. The hearing adjourned at 10:15 a.m. 4/3/91 1