The Lubbock City Council voted Oct. 28 to repeal Ordinance 2025\u201100111, which would have required permits and fees for third\u2011party monitored alarm systems, after lengthy public comment and a staff briefing on alarm calls.<\/p>\n
Assistant Police Chief Neil Baron told the council the ordinance was intended to \u2018\u2018free up first responders to answer higher\u2011priority calls\u2019\u2019 and said alarm calls consumed thousands of officer hours in 2024. \u2018\u2018We sent two officers to each alarm call,\u2019\u2019 he said, estimating police spent roughly 5,027 hours responding to false alarms last year. Baron also clarified the ordinance targeted third\u2011party monitored systems and would not apply to devices monitored by a homeowner\u2019s phone or to car alarms.<\/p>\n
Residents criticized the permit and fee structure during the public\u2011comment period. \u2018\u2018I\u2019m ashamed of you,\u2019\u2019 said Clint Overland, who called the permit \u2018\u2018another tax\u2019\u2019 that would fall hardest on low\u2011income households and seniors. Tanya Jernberg, who cited local and FBI crime data, warned that fines could discourage alarm use and increase risk: \u2018\u2018A retiree living on a fixed income might disable her system completely because she can barely afford the senior discount permit rate,\u2019\u2019 she said.<\/p>\n
Several council members, noting they had not been fully briefed on fee mechanics and implementation, supported repeal. Councilman Glasheen said he had \u2018\u2018not accurately understood the way that staff intended to implement\u2019\u2019 the ordinance and called the staff briefing \u2018\u2018inadequate\u2019\u2019; he moved to repeal and was seconded by Councilwoman Doctor Wilson. Council members who supported repeal said they still backed police efforts to reduce unnecessary responses but preferred a narrower approach focused on repeat or negligent false alarms and more public input.<\/p>\n
The motion to repeal carried; the transcript records the motion and the mayor pro tem\u2019s announcement that the motion carried, but does not record a numeric roll\u2011call tally. Council members directed staff to return with a revised approach after broader briefing, additional data and public engagement.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"The Lubbock City Council voted Oct. 28 to repeal Ordinance 2025\u201100111, which would have required permits and fees…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":29538,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[16],"tags":[168,170,169],"class_list":["post-29537","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-lubbock","tag-lubbock","tag-lubbock-headlines","tag-lubbock-news"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-tx\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/29537","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-tx\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-tx\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-tx\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-tx\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=29537"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-tx\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/29537\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-tx\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/29538"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-tx\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=29537"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-tx\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=29537"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-tx\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=29537"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}