The current and future growth of alarms for commercial and residential properties is documented, and the problem of falsing is explored. The consequences of falsing at its present rate are noted to be a greatly reduced police response rate for alarms, as well as sanctions against alarm owners. The different perspectives of falsing held by persons involved with burglar alarm systems are presented, including views held by police, alarm industry, insurance companies, and subscribers. Current efforts by cities to control false alarms are reviewed, and it is concluded that there is a need to develop a more comprehensive proactive alarm-management approach instead of reactive punitive legislation. Guidelines are provided for developing a community security master plan that can be applied to individual cities in assessing alarm management efforts. Various alarm management alternatives are presented which emphasize the proven approach of master planning. The alarm management alternatives are based on the assumption that more centralized authority is necessary for adequate control over falsing. This can be vested in either the private or public sector. The concluding discussions explore what future technology offers regarding alarm capability. This report is directed primarily toward public officials who may not be familiar with alarm technology, but who are or will be responsible for managing the public safety resources committed as a result of alarms. A glossary, various city ordinances regarding false alarms, the LEAA model ordinance, and the Los Angeles Police Department program are appended. The bibliography contains about 50 listings. (Author abstract modified)