Tapping the Power of the Public in the Residential Sprinkler Fight

When the membership of the International Code Council (ICC) voted to include the requirement for residential fire sprinklers in new construction, many of us in the prevention world thought it was the beginning of the end of the long struggle to get sprinklers into every new home built in the United States. As the events of the past several months have shown, that thinking was naà¯ve.

From a public policy perspective, we’re learning firsthand that we’re not the final decision-makers in establishing the “law of the land.” In state after state, the concerted lobbying efforts of the homebuilders are resulting in legislation that removes the requirement for residential fire sprinklers from the International Residential Code (IRC). I am not a legal expert, but I would imagine that making this change via state law would remove the liability that may be associated with deviating from the model national code. In other words, someone wishing to sue based on the concept that their home was built without the protections afforded by a national standard of safety would come up against the local legislation that such sprinklers aren’t mandatory.

If amending the codes hasn’t significantly changed the situation, then what’s our next step?

The Art of Influence
There are a variety of theories regarding how public policy is determined. One theory holds that an elite few determine public policy outcomes. Another holds that a constantly changing mix of groups influences public policy decisions, in a push and pull of waxing and waning levels of influence. In the United States, which is essentially a two-party system, I think both theories apply: lawmakers, who make public policy via laws, are also swayed by a variety of sub-groups, all with specific views of their own about what government should and should not do.

Those who have a responsibility to carry out laws–as we code officials do–also have influence on their development. When no one cares about our rules (e.g., how many extinguishers to require) then they stand. However, when the rules we collectively promulgate generate sufficient public concern–as the sprinkler requirements have–then our ability to determine public policy is challenged. Hence the push in legislatures all across the nation against residential fire sprinklers.

How then are we to influence public policy in this arena? From the bottom up.

Maryland State Fire Marshal Bill Barnard says this ground-up view has been in play in his state for many years. The slow but steady rise of local ordinances requiring residential sprinklers has resulted in a majority of Maryland counties requiring them in all residential properties, and the rest requiring them in multi-family townhomes and modular housing. That, in part, allowed the state to adopt, in whole, the IRC–without eliminating the fire sprinkler requirement.

Even with considerable public support, however, the battle is tough. In 2010, the State Attorney General issued an opinion that allowed local jurisdictions to opt out of the state-adopted code where residential fire sprinklers were concerned. As Barnard notes, the public policy debate isn’t over, even in Maryland. The efforts to continue building on the success they have had to date will continue for some time.

The Power of Education
In the end, the fire sprinkler battle will come down to what the Home Fire Sprinkler Coalition has been arguing from the beginning: We must continue to educate people about the value of residential fire sprinklers. Only by doing so will we gain enough support from the general public to help sway the public policy debate. Remember: Public education and advocacy are two of the 16 Life Safety Initiatives (#14 and #15). When enough people see the value of sprinklers, it will no longer be our relatively small fire service group discussing the merits of a requirement–it will be the average Joe or Jane demanding them.

And that’s how I think public policy for important issues will be determined in the foreseeable future. Sure, money has influence, and no one can doubt that. But enough people changed their view over time about smoking in public places. That, in turn, changed public policy decisions about cigarettes, regardless of the big dollars that tobacco interests spent to defend smoking in public.

If we take the argument to the people, we can hopefully one day say the same thing about residential fire sprinklers.