Update: This story was updated after Lubbock City Council's Oct. 28 decision to repeal the false alarm ordinance.
On August 26, Lubbock’s City Council heard a proposal from Lubbock Police Chief Seth Herman, presenting an updated ordinance to address the issue of false alarm system calls that he said are diverting officers from other duties.
On September 9, the second reading was approved, with the ordinance to take effect on October 1.
The combined time of public discussion in the two Lubbock city council meetings before the unanimous approval of the city’s updated false alarm ordinance totaled less than four minutes.
Now, the city council has placed the ordinance on pause.
The ordinance would’ve required a permit and a $50 annual fee for alarm systems in Lubbock, as well as a $50 fine for each subsequent false alarm after the first three. For alarm owners 65-years-old and older, the permit fee would be $25.
After the September meeting, Chief Herman spoke to KTTZ about the issue of excessive false alarm calls in Lubbock.
“Each alarm call requires the deployment of at least two officers for safety reasons, and depending on the size of the structure, it could expand well beyond that,” Herman said. “This cuts down on those number of calls that we don't need to respond to, so that they can focus on that proactive enforcement component that decreases crime and keeps our public safe.”
According to data from Lubbock Police, 2025 saw nearly 8,900 alarm-down calls for service, and 75% of them were false alarms. LPD data indicates that percentage has ranged from 74% to almost 79% over the last five years.
Shortly after the ordinance took effect on Oct. 1, concerns from the public began to circulate, and police directed citizens to a page of ordinance information on the city website, emphasizing that the official permit requirement letters being sent were not part of any scam.
On Oct. 16, Lubbock Police held a press conference to address the concerns.
LPD Assistant Chief Nathan White defined the false alarms in question as “when an alarm system signals trouble electronically” to dispatchers, with no confirmation from an eyewitness or evidence of a crime from the scene once officers have arrived.
“With a third-party vendor, we don't have anybody that actually is there telling us what's happening, letting us know it's an actual emergency,” White said. “Whereas if a homeowner sees it on the camera, or sees it some other way, they can tell us what's going on, and they can verify that it's an actual emergency.”
White said other cities have used a similar ordinance.
“When there's an upfront cost, alarm owners tend to keep their systems in good working order. They tend to test their batteries, update contacts, train users on how to best use the system,” White said. “And other cities have used this model implemented in their cities.”
Whether the alarm system permits and fine structure have reduced the problem of false alarms for those cities remains unclear.
San Antonio has required permits for alarm systems for years, with fines for unregistered false alarms in 2003 starting at $25. According to information from the San Antonio Police Department, in 2009, “over 90%” of burglary alarms were false. Now, the City of San Antonio website says that in 2022, 91% of burglary calls were false alarms.
Last year, the San Antonio city government doubled their alarm fees for unregistered false alarm calls to $250.
Like San Antonio, Lubbock’s ordinance would not charge a fine for the first three false burglary alarm calls in a 12-month period. After which, someone in Lubbock could be charged $50 for the fourth and fifth false alarm calls, and $100 for every call after that.
Assistant Chief White also pointed out that false alarm fines can be disputed and would carry specific exceptions for false alarms triggered by weather.
One of LPD’s primary goals with the annual permit and monitoring, according to White, would be to help police triage calls for service to identify repeated false alarm violations.
“Without the permitting process, it's going to be much more difficult to identify and correct the behavior of repeat offenders, which eliminates the officers from being able to respond to legitimate emergencies,” White said.
A day after LPD’s conference, Lubbock’s city council announced that they would be “revisiting” the ordinance in the upcoming meeting on Tuesday, Oct. 28, with no permits or fines to be issued in the meantime.
District 5 city council representative Dr. Jennifer Wilson posted on social media that the council would be “taking a closer look at how the ordinance is structured.”
Update: The Oct. 28 meeting
The meeting began with Lubbock citizens speaking to council members, including Clint Overland, who gave his thoughts about the false alarm ordinance.
"I'm ashamed of you," Overland said. "Especially, as I said, if you ran on a Republican, small government ticket. Y'all know better than this, each and every one of you."
Overland emphasized the annual permit fee that he sees as "another tax" that could be increased by the city government in the future.
Tanya Jernberg also spoke to the city council with similar sentiments, adding that she believes this permit and fee would give some citizens a reason not to buy an alarm in the first place, along with added work and expenses for the city to process the updated permit system, as well as disputes when the false alarm fees are contested.
Both Jernberg and Overland said they had to take time off from work to come share their thoughts with the city council in the Tuesday afternoon meeting.
"This problem really needs to be investigated thoroughly from all angles, for starters, scheduling city council meetings in the evening to allow other concerned Lubbock citizens who work during the day to be here like us, to voice their concerns," Jernberg said.
Ahead of the city council's discussion, Lubbock Police Assistant Chief Neal Barron presented police data on the problem that false alarms have placed on LPD officers.
There is no confirmed number for how many electronic alarm systems exist in Lubbock, but Barron said estimates indicate about 10% of the population has alarm systems. He said in terms of officer resources, that would mean a majority of citizens are paying taxes for officers to respond to the minority who own alarms, and the even smaller portion who have repeated false alarms going directly to police dispatchers.
"Our officers dedicated over 5,000 hours to responding to false alarms in 2024," Barron said. "With a permitted system, we can reduce that time because we have it directly on file who to contact in regard to that alarm."
Police data indicates about 65% of all alarms come from commercial locations, but the percentage of false alarms for both residential and commercial locations ranged between 84-87% in 2024.
Barron explained that the previous city ordinance already required a permit after three false alarm calls in a calendar year, and 1,687 permits were issued by police in 2024. He also noted that in the more than two weeks that the updated ordinance was active, LPD dispatch received 332 false alarm calls.
"51 locations experienced four or more false alarms that resulted in us sending out 73 different bills to those locations," Barron said.
Under the previous ordinance, the city already collected nearly $149,000 in fees and fines in 2024, according to LPD.
In response to the pushback that LPD received when the updated ordinace took effect, Barron presented changes that the department would recommend for the ordinance, starting with a clearer definition of what alarm systems need permits.
"If you have an alarm system and it's not set up to call the police, or you request to the alarm company not to call the police, then you don't have to have this," Barron said.
LPD's recommendations also included clarifying that false alarm notifications would not include alarms caused by vandalism, weather events, or mechanical or electrical problems. Barron clarified that there's no permit required for police to respond to alarms, but repeated false alarms can be fined.
"We'll come out. We want to make sure everyone knows that we're coming," Barron said. "We just don't want to come if it's false."
In the council's discussion, District 4 council member Brandon Rose said he recognizes the problematic weight that false alarms have placed on LPD officer resources, but he's still unsure how the permit and fee structure will relieve that.
"It doesn't seem that putting a fee on citizens to have an alarm system monitored is going to deter these false alarms," Rose said. "It seems like we're collecting quite a bit of money as it is with the false alarms, and they're still going off."
District 3 city council member David Glasheen called to repeal the updated ordinance that he and other council members unanimously passed in August, and he opened his response with an apology.
"Along with other members of the council, I place this ordinance on the agenda today because the council made a mistake in passing this ordinance," Glasheen said. "We need to, today, acknowledge it, apologize to the community, and fix our mistake."
Glasheen confirmed with city legal staff that the ordinance updates have been in early drafts and discussion between LPD and city staff for at least 18 months, but Glasheen said he didn't see the ordinance in any form until it was first on the agenda in August.
"I generally believe in the philosophy that you should praise in public and criticize in private," Glasheen said. "But because of our city's obligation to open meetings and open discussion to the public, we have to have the critical discussions in public as well."
Glasheen's repeal was unanimously approved by council members, excepting Mayor Mark McBrayer and District 2 council member Gordon Harris, who were not present for the Oct. 28 meeting.
Glasheen said he would like to see a solution to the issue presented and discussed in public, but it has not yet been specified when or if the false alarm ordinance will be revisited in the future.
For those who paid an updated permit fee after the ordinance was passed, the Lubbock Police Department is issuing a refund.
LPD said voided checks and credit card refund transaction letters will be mailed by Nov. 7, and refund checks from the city for cash payments will be mailed by Nov. 14.
Those who have not received their refunds by Nov. 18 are asked to call Alarm Permitting at (806) 775-3041.