February 9, 2011
******************
********************
Note - the proposal to license central stations in New York has been advanced and promoted by NYBFAA. I oppose it as unnecessary and burdensome.
I have been asked by Ed Bonifas, president of CSAA [Central Station Alarm Association] to advise all of CSAA's position. It's membership and board of directors are opposed to any future licensing that may add burdensome costs and add little to public benefit, and they oppose the proposed New York central station licensing proposal. CSAA hopes that the almost universal opposition expressed by the alarm industry, especially the central stations, will convince those proponents of the proposed legislation to reconsider and work instead to prevent the proposal from going any further than it has. I concur with CSAA that this issue is best addressed at the Federal level.
************
To:
Mr. Joseph Hayes,
I have read the proposed law (several times). Can you tell me who decided to bring this issue to Ex, Senator Foleys Office?
Who were the main players in writing this proposal?
Mike
CSS
******************
To:
Joseph Hayes
President
New York Burglar & Fire Alarm Association
234 Hudson Avenue
PMB# 9401
Albany, NY 12210
February 1, 2011
Dear Mr. Hayes and board members,
I would like to express opposition to the proposed legislation, known as
6E, which would require state licensing of Central Monitoring Stations in New York.
Though Direct Alarm does not do business in the state of New York,
we are against any unwanted legislation that may set a precedent for other
states to follow. While the proposed legislation may have good intentions
behind it, the legislation is unnecessary for the good or betterment of the electronic security industry or its consumers. The following are a couple of reasons that we feel make the legislation unnecessary.
Central Stations are already governed by their clients.
Electronic security companies demand quality from the central station
that they use so that their end-users are satisfied with service and response.
A few of the things that electronic security companies demand from their
central stations are: a UUFX Underwriter's Laboratories (UL) listing, a
Factory Mutual (FM) approval, and a CSAA certification.
Government is not competent enough to provide a service to this
industry.
Professionals at Underwriter's Laboratories, Factory Mutual, and CSAA
have spent decades researching the industry in order to provide ample,
precise, and stringent standards and requirements which Central
Monitoring Stations use to govern themselves. In no way will the
government of the state of New York be able to provide a positive or
useful service to the electronic security industry or the central
station industry in the face of what is already present and changes
daily.
Thank you for considering our firm stance on the proposed legislation
6E. I hope that you will govern yourselves accordingly and do what is
best for the industry and its consumers and do away with this proposal
and all that bear similarity to it.
Sincerely,
Danny L. Dunson Jr.
Vice President, Sales
Direct Alarm
233 West Taylor Street
Suite 101
Griffin, GA 30223
***************
Dear Mr. Kirschenbaum,
I have been reading and watching all the hubbub on the Kenneth Kirschenbaum’s ALARM - SECURITY INDUSTRY LEGAL EMAIL NEWSLETTER, about the proposed NYS Article 6-E, Business of Alarm Monitoring.
Having been in the alarm industry since 1966, a member of the Metropolitan Burglar Alarm Association of NY (MBFAA) since 1976, and founding Corporate Secretary of the New York Burglar and Fire Alarm Association, past president of the MBFAA, past Executive Director of the New York Fire Alarm Association, and the Executive Director of the MBFAA, I feel that I must address the issue of the New York Burglar and Fire Alarm Association’s (in cooperation with the Long Island Alarm Association) Preliminary Document and Draft of what they call Article 6-E, Business of Alarm Monitoring, Revision 11, dated 6/11/2010. A full copy of this document can be found on their web site.
While there have been many rebuttals on the Kenneth Kirschenbaum, Esq. web site and other forums regarding any new or additional licensing law in the State of New York, for either regulatory or monetary issues, I feel I must address the issues and provisions within the law itself. A careful reading and dissecting of NYBFAA’s 6-E should be EVERY New York State Business of Installing, Servicing or Maintaining Security or Fire Alarm Systems Article 6-D, NY licensed alarm company’s mandate to read, scrutinize and be their concern, since it will affect their business as well.
My comments are for discussion purposes only and are not intended as a re-write, interpret, or offer legal advice. Just the opinion of someone in the business 45 years, and who was around when the original Article 6-E license law as written by the MBFAA and sponsored by Senator Jeremiah Bloom. These are just some of my comments for the sake of space.
§ 69-aa. Definitions.
5. "The business of Alarm Monitoring” means a person who holds himself out
directly or indirectly. As being able, or who offers or undertakes, by any means or methods, to monitor life safety, security, personal response, duress signals, elevator alarms and video surveillance systems including but not limited to property integrity and sensitive information and/or either verifies signals or retransmits signals to PSAP, Fire Dept, Police Departments, or any governmental agencies within the State of New York.
I did a quick survey in the New York City metropolitan area and saw at least 150 alarm companies that indicated they provide (as described in paragraph 69-aa above: “who holds himself out directly or indirectly”) “alarm monitoring” or “central station” services. The enactment of this law would put at least those 150 alarm companies in violation of the proposed NYBFAA’s Article 6-E. Yellow page advertising would have to be changed. Lawn signs remade. Window decals remade. Trucks repainted. Web sites redesigned! How many other legitimately licensed alarm companies throughout New York State will have to redefine the services that their company provides because of paragraph 69-aa?! Kerching! $1,000, $2,000, $3,000…. Fines out the door!
§ 69-dd. Executive or principal license after application.
2. Each application shall be accompany by fingerprints of the applicant to be recorded in such
manner as the secretary of state may prescribe by rule, The fingerprints shall be taken in the manner and approved for by the State Division of Criminal Justice Services and shall be accompanied by the appropriate processing fees in proper form for the division of criminal justice services, in order to ascertain whether the applicant has been convicted of the enumerated offenses in paragraph (C) of subdivision three of this section.
As best as I can determine, the New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services can or will only check the fingerprints and background of license applicants for convictions in the State of New York. What about the hundreds of central stations in almost every other state. If an applicant in Tennessee has a criminal conviction in that state will New York State Division of Criminal Justice
Services pick that up? How many New York State based alarm companies are using out of state alarm monitoring services? So what’s the purpose here? Just to put the burden on New York State companies?
§ 69-ee. Qualified manager. 1. Each alarm monitoring organization shall have a designated agent who shall:
(a) be selected to have full responsibility for the operation of the alarm monitoring center and shall have passed an examination prepared by the secretary of state. Such examination, which shall be the same for all applicants, may be partly written and partly oral and shall not be confined to any specific method or system. No person shall receive a license hereunder who has not actually demonstrated to the Secretary of State his ability and fitness to engage in the business of alarm monitoring.
Very open ended here! Nowhere do I see a definition of ability and fitness to engage in the business of alarm monitoring. Subject to NYS DOS DLS interpretation.
2. Any individual over the age of eighteen years who shall present to the Secretary of State satisfactory evidence that he has been actually engaged in the business of alarm monitoring in this state for at least two years within the period of three years immediately prior to January first, two thousand eleven, shall be entitled to a license under this section without examination, provided that application therefore is accompanied by the requirements of subdivision one of this section.
So you’re telling me that the oldest alarm monitoring services in the United States, Emergency24 in IL, has to take a test to get a license? And HUNDREDS of others throughout the United States will have to take a test as well!? Or better yet… I could have been in the business since I was 15 years old and get a license without a test. You do the math!
5. Employer Responsibility Principals/employers shall be held responsible for any actions committed by their operators when they are beyond the jurisdiction of the New York State Department of State. Out of State Licensee’s shall provide Power of Attorney to the Attorney General’s office for the purpose of being served legal notices or subpoenas out of state. Not sure if this means YOU are going to jail because of the actions of one of your employees!
§ 69-ff. Covered employees and Monitoring Station Operators.
4. All monitoring station operators shall be required to take within 30 days a monitoring station operator course offered by the security industry association or the association of public-safety communications officials or a central station training course offered or approved by the central station alarm association, or a similar course approved by the secretary of state, all of which shall meet the following criteria:
Gee, sounds like a promotional piece for the SIA or APSCO, or CSAA. The original Article 6-E allowed for New York State industry trade associations and local educational institutions to do the training in New York State. Subject to NYS auditing and scrutiny.
§69-gg. Alarm monitoring organization’s records. 1. the alarm monitoring organization shall maintain records on file to verify completion of required training and continuing education for all monitoring station operators.
So NYS DOS DLS agents have a budget to travel to Hawaii, Las Vegas, perhaps Southern California, to examine central station records? Or central stations only located in physical New York State will be subject to scrutiny and audits? How about it New York State Central Stations, keep the coffee pots brewing, because you will get the audits!
§ 69-pp Local Jurisdiction 1.Local municipality that have adopted false alarm
ordinances shall not hold the monitoring company licensed under article 6E to be held responsible for the actions of any alarm system installed by a persons or Company licensed under Article 6D, or shall be responsible for the collection of any false alarm fines imposed by local authorities.
Nice for the monitoring companies in the state of New York. They are not responsible for false alarm fines. What about the other 49 States? I wonder what the governor of NJ is going to say to a central station in NY when the NY central station says “I ain’t going to pay that fine because I am covered by 69-pp of Article 6-E?” And how many monitoring services in NYS are monitoring for unlicensed companies? Who is going to pay that fine!? Or how many central stations monitor directly for the consumer? Who’s going to pay that fine? Does a central station company that does installations ALSO have to get a 6-D license so they can turn themselves in and pay their own fine?
§ 69-vv. Homeland Security Effort. All licensees under this article must register their company and address with the Department. Only the license holder and monitoring station operators are authorized to dispatch and respond to received signals. Transferring the monitoring operation to ghost facilities not registered with the Department or located outside the United States is prohibited. As a Consumer Protection and Homeland Security Initiative, having confidential or sensitive records taken off shore and beyond the control of the US government is
strictly prohibited. The Department shall have the ability to make site visits for Centers located within New York State.
So NYS DOS DLS agents DON’T have a budget to travel to Hawaii, Las Vegas, Southern California, to examine central station records and facilities? Central stations only located in physical New York State will be subject to audits and scrutiny? How about it you New York State Central Stations, keep the coffee pots brewing, because you will get the audits! All you other guys… you lucked out.
In my opinion the Article 6-E Business of Alarm Monitoring license law is not necessary. Article 6-D New York State Business of Installing, Servicing or Maintaining Security or Fire Alarm Systems covers perhaps 80 to 90 percent of what is trying to be accomplished in the proposed Article 6-E. At the very least Article 6-E can be modified and revised in a fair and equitable manner to include Central Stations and Alarm Monitoring Services doing business in New York State that are located within New York State and throughout the United States.
Just one person’s thoughts for you to ponder.
Sincerely,
Alan Glasser
Executive Director of MBFAA
************