COUNCIL THROWS WEIGHT BEHIND ALARM RESPONSE.

Byline: Mariel Garza Staff Writer

Reversing its earlier position, the Los Angeles City Council on Tuesday endorsed an alternative to the Police Commission's strict new decision to stop sending police officers to most ringing burglar alarms.

The 11-0 vote by the previously divided council puts pressure on the commission also to adopt the softer policy, which would allow three false alarms at an address before police stop responding. Mayor James Hahn, who had backed the ban, urged the commission to seriously consider the new proposal.

``I don't expect (commissioners) to ignore this,'' said Harbor-area Councilwoman Janice Hahn, the mayor's sister. She and East Valley Councilwoman Wendy Greuel led a fight to overturn the blanket ban on responding to residential and commercial alarms unless a person's voice verifies a true emergency.

Janice Hahn said she would use the full force of the council to force the issue if the commissioners, who were appointed by her brother, ignore the recommendations.

``I think at this point, I would have the votes on the City Council to assert jurisdiction and veto the (commission's) action,'' she said.

At the urging of Police Chief William Bratton, the Police Commission adopted the new policy in January. The commission and the chief said officers had been wasting too much time responding to false residential and commercial burglar alarms.

In 2002, about 95 percent of the 120,000 dispatched calls stemmed from burglar alarms that proved to be false, accounting for 15 percent of all the LAPD's service calls, according to the commission.

After the commission acted, the council started getting calls from residents, stirred up by upset representatives of the alarm industry. The council debated whether to veto the commission's policy and ask the commissioners to try again. After hours of emotional testimony by residents and debate among council members, the veto attempt failed.

Instead, the council formed a task force of representatives from the alarm industry, the LAPD and neighborhood councils. After two months, the group's members hammered out a plan that they say would cut the amount of time officers waste on false alarms but allow them to continue responding to burglar alarms from residents who don't abuse the system.

Among the task force's 31 recommendations are the three-strike proposal that would allow three false alarms in a year before a nonresponse policy was invoked at an address. Meanwhile, there would be escalating false-alarm fees.

The task force also recommends an ordinance requiring operators of alarm businesses to make their customers get an annual city permit.

If adopted, the recommendations are expected to cut false alarms in half initially and to keep on weeding out offenders as the program continues, according to Chief Legislative Analyst Ron Deaton.

Even the council members who strongly supported the Police Commission's ban in February - such as Council President Alex Padilla and Public Safety Committee Chairwoman Cindy Miscikowski - said the task-force suggestion is superior.

``What we do have is better than the A or B we were asked to choose between in the past,'' Padilla said. ``My primary concern at the time is my primary concern now ..., the issue of deployment and ability of the Police Department to respond to violent crime.''

The unanimous vote was a sharp turnaround for the council, which in February voted 8-6 to veto the Police Commission's nonresponse policy - two votes shy of the 10 required for the veto.

Even the mayor, who professed support of the commission during the debate, took a stronger stance Tuesday.

``The mayor supports the Police Commission giving serious consideration to the recommendations,'' said his spokeswoman Julie Wong.

Police Commission President Rick Caruso said he and the commission will definitely give the task force's recommendations a fair shake - and adopt them if they seem like a good idea.