ENCINITAS — The city will increase fees for nuisance fire alarms — often referred to as false alarms — in an effort to reduce strain on public safety resources and ensure firefighters are available for real emergencies.
The Encinitas Fire Department responded to 493 calls in 2025 that were ultimately determined to be false alarms, according to city documents.
Four institutions — San Dieguito Academy, Scripps Memorial Hospital Encinitas, Seacrest Village and Aviara Healthcare Center — recorded six or more false alarm calls last year, according to City Manager Jennifer Campbell.
Fees are assessed for repeat calls to the same business or residence within a calendar year.
The adopted system maintains the existing structure, in which the first two nuisance alarms do not result in fines. However, if a call is caused by negligence, lack of maintenance or unlawful conduct, the city may still assess a fee.
Under the new structure, fees are as follows:
- Third nuisance alarm within a 12-month period: $75
- Fourth nuisance alarm: $150
- Fifth nuisance alarm: $250
- Each additional nuisance alarm: $500
The fee structure had not been updated since May 1993. In evaluating potential changes, city staff reviewed how neighboring cities structure their false alarm fees.
Oceanside charges $1,000 for each false alarm beginning with the fifth offense and imposes higher fees starting with the second offense. Carlsbad’s fees are more than $100 higher than Encinitas’ for the second through fifth offenses, but cap at $422 from the fourth offense onward, according to city documents.
Solana Beach charges $50 for the first offense, $100 for the second, and a maximum of $150 for the third and subsequent offenses. San Marcos’ fee structure mirrors Encinitas’, though its maximum penalty is $300 starting with the sixth offense.
City staff initially proposed a maximum fine of $300, but Mayor Bruce Ehlers advocated for a higher cap to encourage greater accountability. The City Council unanimously approved the higher maximum fee for repeat violations.
The city estimates that it would have collected $12,150 in 2025 had the San Marcos fee structure been in place.
“When you get those kinds of nuisance alarms going, it’s crying wolf, and it’s not good. It’s behavior we want to curb,” Ehlers said. “When we looked at who it was, it wasn’t a house. It wasn’t a small business. It was large businesses.
“And they’re just writing checks rather than fixing their fundamental problem. So I would like them to write a bigger check.”
