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.”
The city said more information will be provided on the ordinance after the Oct. 28 meeting.