Walden approves Spectrum contract, considers false alarm fines

By Jared Castañeda
Posted 1/22/25

The Village of Walden Board kicked off the new year with its January 7 meeting, featuring a renewal of the village’s cable television contract and a new law that could mitigate false alarms.

This item is available in full to subscribers.

Please log in to continue

Log in

Walden approves Spectrum contract, considers false alarm fines

Posted

The Village of Walden Board kicked off the new year with its January 7 meeting, featuring a renewal of the village’s cable television contract and a new law that could mitigate false alarms.

The board opened the meeting with a public hearing for a cable television agreement between the village and Spectrum Northeast LLC. This agreement would renew the contract between the two parties as the previous one expired, designating Spectrum as a cable and internet service provider for the village.

Before this hearing, many residents questioned whether this agreement would limit access to other providers and force them to use only Spectrum’s services. Deputy Mayor Chris Batson assured that this agreement was a non-exclusive franchise, meaning that other providers besides Spectrum could service the village. Village Attorney David Donovon stated that the agreement would change nothing, and Trustee Ralph Garrison Jr. added that residents could still choose from other local providers.

“The contract clearly states that this is a non-exclusive franchise, so entering into this does not mean that Spectrum can be the single unique provider for us. This is just simply a contract that says they have the right to operate within our service area,” Batson said. “I heard a lot of folks say this limits us to Spectrum; it does not. If other companies want to come in and pursue a similar agreement, they’re empowered and entitled to do so. But this agreement does not stop them from doing it.”

“It seems the trend is people are wondering if they still have the option of choice,” Garrison said. “They 100% still have the option of choice to what is available in the area, this does not restrict them.”

The board approved Spectrum’s contract with two modifications: first, Spectrum would be responsible for the restoration of public ways per village standards, such as tree trimming and sidewalk repairs near the company’s utility poles. And second, the agreement would be enforced under federal, state, and local law. The board will also request Spectrum to remove its preexisting zombie poles, or inoperative utility poles, from the village streets.

Later in the meeting, the board discussed a new local law that would establish penalties for residents and property owners who set off repeated false alarms. This constitutes as an alarm activation when no emergency or criminal activity took place, such as calling the police to report a burglary that never happened. The Walden Police Department would keep track of individuals who report false alarms and send the data to Robert Wallner, the village’s building inspector, who would write warnings, violation notices, and fines to the individuals in question.

“This is basically a draft for your review, it remains a work-in-progress to enforce penalties if there are repeated false alarms,” Donovan said. “You may decide ‘We don’t think it’s a problem in the Village of Walden, we’re not going to do it,’ you may decide ‘We want to do it but we want to change x, y, and z,’ whatever that may be. But this is just a shortened version of what we started with last time for your review.”

Wallner stated that this law would address dilapidated properties containing defective alarm systems that trigger frequently, usually during non-emergencies. The fines would encourage property owners to ensure their alarm systems are functioning correctly and their buildings meet the village’s safety standards.

“If an alarm is called in by a resident, that’s not considered a false alarm. We want to encourage that; if their carbon monoxide alarm or smoke alarm is going off, you want somebody to check it out to make sure that it is not a problem,” Wallner said. “The problem comes from a few abandoned buildings that are still required to have monitored alarm systems, and those systems are starting to fail and they go off constantly. The whole point of having this false alarm law is to encourage the property owner to have a service to get it so it doesn’t keep going off. It could be a faulty alarm.”

Given that Donovan’s draft did not specify the fine amount, Batson suggested that the first two false alarms be free but the third one cost $250, with larger fines for each additional offense. These fines would reset after a new calendar year.

“I couldn’t remember if we discussed that the first and second were free and that the penalty falls for the third, or if you start to pay for the second,” Batson said. “Dealing with this in the private sector every single day, this rotates out of a calendar year, right? It’s my preference that the first and second are free and the $250 penalty starts on the third.”

At the end of the discussion, Donovan stated that he would revise the law’s draft with the board’s suggestions, including the fine amounts, and present the new version at the next meeting.