COUNCIL MAY UNDO LAPD ALARM POLICY HAHN FILES MOTION TO SEND MATTER TO TWO COMMITTEES.

Byline: Mariel Garza Staff Writer

Just one day after the Police Commission adopted a policy to ignore most burglar alarms in the city unless verified as a true emergency, skeptical council members stepped in Wednesday and said the panel may have acted too rashly.

Councilwoman Janice Hahn filed a motion for the council to assert its jurisdiction over the Police Commission's decision and send the matter to the public safety and the education and neighborhoods committees for further study. The matter is scheduled for Tuesday.

Other council members said they want to reopen the debate.

``This is a huge breach of confidence between the people who purchase alarms and our Police Department,'' said Hahn, the sister of Mayor James Hahn. ``It's very troubling that the Police Commission decided to have a non-response policy to burglar alarms in city of Los Angeles without conducting what I consider to be a full public hearing on the matter.''

Hahn said her office was inundated with calls and e-mails from residents, worried they will be vulnerable to crime if police won't immediately respond when their alarm goes off.

She also complained the city's neighborhood councils were not notified of the change, which they should have been under the City Charter.

Police officials maintain that service will actually improve under the new policy, saying LAPD officers currently spend about 15 percent of their time responding to the mostly false burglar alarm calls.

``That's a matter of opinion,'' Hahn said. ``I don't ever think it's a waste of time to drive up and down a residential street or to go into a business district. It gives them an opportunity to go into a neighborhood to see what else is going on.''

Joe Gunn, executive director of the Police Commission, said the panel has been studying the policy change since April but is willing to delay its implementation in order to educate the public.

Currently, police are called by alarm companies when the alarm goes off. Under the change, police will respond only if the home or business owner or someone else verifies there is an emergency.

The policy change will affect the west San Fernando Valley the most. According to Gunn, 2001 figures show nearly 50,000 alarms in the San Fernando Valley, about 30,000 in West Los Angeles, 28,000 in the central city and 20,000 in South Los Angeles.

Alarm company representatives were pleased with Hahn's action.

``That is good news,'' said George Gunning of Canoga Park, co-owner of USA Alarm Systems Inc. and a founding member of the Greater Los Angeles Security Alarm Association. ``It's appropriate for (the policy) to be decided by elected officials. I think citizens of Los Angeles will get a better shake.''

Throughout the debate, alarm company representatives have asserted that criminals will have a field day in Los Angeles if police don't respond to burglar alarms.

``We're hoping the council will reverse the Police Commission decision,'' said Arnie Bell, president of the Southern California Security Association. ``I think the council will be fair about this. I think as elected officials they have the interest of the entire city at heart. The Police Commission is concerned with the Police Department.''

Other council members, including Council President Alex Padilla, favor reopening the debate. Hahn needs 10 votes to assert jurisdiction and another 10 to negate the commission's decision and send it back.