• 2011

From Public Opinion:

South central Pennsylvania suffered a major tragic event this past week, while our state lawmakers actively worked against prevention of similarly tragic events in the future.

Unfortunately, this past week, money spoke louder than safety.

It's sad, but the citizens of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania will have to suffer now that our House lawmakers voted 154-39 to repeal a law that requires sprinkler systems in all new residential construction homes.

Such legislation could prevent disasters like the one in Perry County from occurring.

The bill (S.B. 377) now moves on to the Senate where we as citizens can only hope that state senators will take note and not allow this sprinkler code to be repealed.

As with any issue in Harrisburg, the battle lines have been clearly drawn and all of them have pros and cons. On one side are the public safety officials, along with the many dedicated firefighters and emergency service personnel who know from personal experience that home sprinklers DO save lives and property. On the other side are the realtors and home builders who say that the additional cost of installing sprinklers in new homes is a detriment to sales, particularly in a weak housing market.

The vote by our state legislators was strongly in support of its repeal. The builders have a strong lobbying effort, and it showed by the tens of thousands of dollars that were spent fighting to have the code repealed via the many ads in newspapers and

contributions to our elected officials' campaign war chests.

This stance alone shows that economic concerns are much more persuasive than common sense and life safety.

The cost argument that has been put forward by the builders is a legitimate argument. But it's the overall cost that seems to change, depending on whether you're speaking with someone who favors sprinklers or someone who opposes them.

Many studies have been provided by both sides and an acceptable price range would be $1.65 per square foot. Factor this price into a 3,000-square-foot home, and your price comes to just under $5,000. When you look at the overall price of most new homes today in the Harrisburg region, I think you would have to say that $5,000 isn't a whole lot of extra money in a new home that is going to be your life dream and most likely the place you will live in for the remainder of your life.

When you look at this figure in light of a 30-year mortgage, it would equal approximately $14 of additional cost per month. Is fire protection on your life's dream and the safety of your family not worth $14? Yes, the $5,000 figure is for an average cost, and the bigger the home is, the more the system will cost. But this is true with most all aspects of a new home construction -- the bigger the home is, the more the electrical system, HVAC, plumbing and the structure itself will cost.

Some say that their home already has fire protection, since hard-wired smoke detectors are required. Unfortunately a smoke detector will not put out a fire. It will only alert you to a fire in your home.

By having sprinklers, you have the added protection of a fire suppression system on site. It's like having a fire department in your home 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

An argument that I find very interesting from sprinkler opponents is their claim that the law is burdensome on rural communities. But that's the area where I would think you would want sprinklers. Sprinklers can limit the fire damage and even extinguish a fire prior to a fire department arrives. The lack of water sources for fire departments and the lack of manpower for our dedicated volunteer systems in rural areas only supports the argument that sprinklers are the best fit for a rural setting.

When you look at the overall cost for a sprinkler system on an average size home and compare it to the cost of a tragic event that could involve the loss of a life, I think you will see that the sprinklers are well worth the price.

As an elected official in my local school board, I can say that safety for our students is always at the top of my priority list. How our state elected officials can say that they had safety as their top priority when voting to repeal the sprinkler code is beyond me.

When you look at all of the facts that are out there today, I think you will see that there is no debate on the effectiveness of sprinklers. Sprinklers do save lives and they have prevented events similar to those that we have been reading about in the newspapers over the past five months.

How many more lives need to be lost before our elected officials will see that sprinklers are the most effective way to save lives?