Comments for Bend, Oregon Chamber

Comment on Sound Off: What Are Your Greatest Business Challenges? by Craig Bates

Craig Bates — Sat, 12 May 2012 23:04:39 +0000

For the size of Bend, why don’t they have a good public transportation system?

Comment on False Alarm Ordinance, Should We Pay to Register? by Lori Sensenbach

Lori Sensenbach — Fri, 11 May 2012 19:38:58 +0000

As a business required by state regulations to maintain an alarm system in order to protect my clients’ confidentiality, I find it discouraging that we may incur an additional expense imposed by the city. I agree that my business has a responsibility to our community to be a good steward of the limited resources we have. I disagree with systems that impose penalties on all when there are a limited number of offenders. I support the idea of imposing increasing fines on repeat offenders starting with the second false alarm.

Comment on Raising money for a four year university in Bend by Jeff Robberson

Jeff Robberson — Fri, 11 May 2012 17:29:27 +0000

As a business owner I am willing to throw my support behind the reality of making OSU Cascades Campus a full four year University. The benefits to our community are truly endleess, from direct economic impact, to attracting more companies, to allowing our exisiting Bendites the ability to continue their eduacaion at home, where they otherewise might not be able to. I am in and I think the chamber should take a leadership role as well!

Comment on Should Bend have a Four Year University? by David Jones

David Jones — Fri, 11 May 2012 17:28:55 +0000

No, but then I may be the only one in Bend to feel that way. From what I can tell EVERYONE wants Bend to get bigger and bigger. Even the environmentalists can’t wait for a 4 year university, I guess there will be more environmentalists then…

Comment on Raising money for a four year university in Bend by Wes Price

Wes Price — Fri, 11 May 2012 15:39:58 +0000

This is absolutely the biggest immediate economic development opportunity that our community has been presented with ever. After 20 years of efforts to get this accomplished we finally have a tangible way to show that we support getting OSU Cascades to full four year university status. I am in!

Comment on False Alarm Ordinance, Should We Pay to Register? by Support

Support — Mon, 07 May 2012 23:13:07 +0000

Great article, Tim. I think a fee on the first seems a little strict. I’d go with the second or third. Of course, false alarms happen. I’d vote for a community service alternative to the fee.

Comment on False Alarm Ordinance, Should We Pay to Register? by Tom Anderson

Tom Anderson — Fri, 04 May 2012 23:17:28 +0000

Looks like another method to raise revenue while reducing services….”to Protect and Serve” will become “to Protect and to fine”. To add false alarms as a revenue source is a sure way to insure all alarms are false…..who comes up with these ideas? How about saving the $110,000 by eliminating the folks that want to create this new administrative mess.

Comment on False Alarm Ordinance, Should We Pay to Register? by Joshua Smith

Joshua Smith — Fri, 04 May 2012 19:44:10 +0000

I’m the area manager for North Pacific Security, Inc. Businesses in the area such as our offer a fee based alarm response service which is significantly less costly than what police departments charge for alarm responses.

It was also proposed that the Investigations Department wouldn’t spend much time investigating thefts of less than $100,000.00. I am very curious how they came up with such a number, as this seems rather high.

Comment on False Alarm Ordinance, Should We Pay to Register? by Jamie Kendellen

Jamie Kendellen — Fri, 04 May 2012 18:08:59 +0000

If the $111,000 estimated cost is a sound estimate, then yes, escalating fines should be imposed. It is every community member’s responsibility to help our government use its resources in the most fiscally responsible manner as well as use the resources in the manner intended. I agree with Tim Casey that adding another level of bureaucracy would be inefficient and unnecessary. His solution to this problem is reasonable.

Comment on False Alarm Ordinance, Should We Pay to Register? by Tim Casey

Tim Casey — Fri, 04 May 2012 16:47:10 +0000

At issue, Bend Police respond to approximately 2,167 false alarms per year at an estimated cost of $111,000.

Staff’s recommendation is twofold:
• Begin imposing a fee (cost TBD) on businesses and residents starting with the first false alarm, rather than the current standard of charging for the third.
• Require all businesses and residents with an alarm system to register their alarm and asses an annual fee (cost TBD) for the registration . A third party vendor would then be hired to maintain and administer the registration program, as well as conduct inspections.

Our goal should be to reduce the number of false alarms and provide local law enforcement with a means of contacting the business owner and residents. I believe there is a far simpler solution than the creation of yet another level of bureaucracy and imposing a tax on businesses which do not create false alarms.
• The City already collects a business license fee and application, just add a box to check if you have an alarm and who the contact should be in the event it goes off.
• Secondly, anyone can have a false alarm, accidents happen, I don’t believe a fine should not be levied on the first incident. I do think there should be a dramatically escalating fee for businesses who habitually have false alarms. If they feel the pain in their pocket book, they will take action to correct the issue, if not, the City will recoup the loss through fines. This will ensure the burden is not carried by the entire business community, but by those who cause the issue.

All businesses should not be penalized because of the habitual offenders. Information can be easily gathered by a simple change to the business license application. Residents can fill out a simple online application. There needs to be a public notice, registration period and a fine for not registering. There is no need to spend more money to hire a third party administrator to recoup the loss. Once the false alarms have been reduced, we are then left with the annual reoccurring cost of the third party administrator.