AG19820517 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. Charles McGinnis Page 2 April 29, 1982 Mr. Howard Searboro and Mr. Terry Black of t~a Cabarrus County Sheriff's Department were contacted regarding working relationships between Mr. Blackwelder's company and the Sheriff's Department. goth indicated that Mr. Blackwelder was very cooperative with the department and he made every effort to work within the policy and guidelines of the Sheriff's Department. They also stated that Mr. Blaekwelder was quick to respond to complaints from alarm subscribers when system problems existed. The Wadesboro Police Department has allowed Mr. Henry Morton of Spectrum Sales to install the DART System in Anson County's Emergency Communications Control Center. The system has been in place approximately one month and no major problems have emerged during that month. At this time, only a few locations are connected to the system and all alarms seems to be functioning normally. At this time no cemplaints have surfaced concerning modification costs on existing alarms for hook up to the DART System. Overall, the Anson County and City of Wadesboro officials seem to be satisfied with the performance of the system. They wara~ however~ quick to point out that the system had been operational for only one month and that few locations were on line at this time. If the claims of the DART ~ystem representatives are accurate then the system offers definite 5eneflts over the traditional monitoring panels with indicator lights or audible speakers. There is no evidence at this time to justify doubt in the system's capabilities. It should also be pointed out, however, that the system is relatively new and has not developed a long term track record. One potential problem area is that of conversion costs for existing alarm systems. This is estimated hy Mr, Elac~welder at $200.00 per alarm system~ There will pro- bably ~e some complaints about having to pay the additlonal.$200~00. Mr. Roy Bro~al of the S.B.I. pointed out that this is a source of alnumber of complaints to his office. The turnover of alarm systemst representatives and periodic technological improvements in systems creates a dilemma for law enforcement. This has brought on a new trend among law enforcement agencies regarding monitoring alarms. Simply stated, the.~treRd~s toyard~ a~f~rcem~.~en_~_agencia~ getti~g~out of the al_a__l_.ar_~marm moni.taring_businase.__Si~ Cabarrus County_~ ~_~novi_3_ng.~th~e~r__~pm3~a~ions center to a new loeatiq~, ~1~-~-~o continue tR Bro~ide--this_s~ryice~ Private companies provide central ~m-~nitoring and weed out the false calls from the real thing prior to notification of law enforcement, This does not result in significant delay in response since their personnel are spatially trained to recognizo false alarms from actual emergencies. The result for law enforcement is savings in manpower utilization as well as a decrease in negative public relations resulting from faulty equipment. Quite often citizens assume that if the equipment is monitored at the law enforcement center, then the county or city involved should be accountable for faulty equipment.