Home » News » Politics
Governor blocks limits on sprinkler rules
CONCORD — A second legislative attempt to block local fire and planning officials from setting rules on residential sprinklers has been vetoed.
Gov. John Lynch Wednesday vetoed Senate Bill 91, saying it intrudes too far on local authority.
SB 91 bars towns and cities from passing ordinances that require fire sprinkler systems in new one- and two-family homes. It also bars them from enforcing existing ordinances that require them in manufactured homes situated in trailer parks.
Lynch said, “The decision of whether or not to require automatic sprinkler systems for new or renovated residential development has been, and should remain, a local one. The State should not preempt local decision-making.”
He said the state fire marshal and local fire officials believe the flexibility on the issue should be left with local government. Without sprinklers as an option, towns will be forced to other possibly more expensive options like fire ponds, cisterns or greater distances between homes, Lynch said.
Lawmakers overrode Lynch’s veto of a similar bill, HB 109, last month. That bill, too, barred new fire suppression sprinkler ordinances, but did not block enforcement of existing rules.
Veto of HB 109 was overridden by a 294-72 vote in the House, and 17-6 in the Senate.
Speaker of the House William O’Brien ignored Lynch’s argument that local government should decide fire safety, and said the bill is meant to make housing more affordable. Mandatory sprinklers would impose “costly and ill-considered regulations” on builders, he said.
Noting the override of the HB 109 veto, O’Brien said, “We are sad to see that he chose to continue to make the same bad decision on this bill.”
House Majority Leader D.J. Bettencourt, R-Salem, said, “Our housing industry needs a jump start, not a kick in the gut.”
Gov. John Lynch Wednesday vetoed Senate Bill 91, saying it intrudes too far on local authority.
SB 91 bars towns and cities from passing ordinances that require fire sprinkler systems in new one- and two-family homes. It also bars them from enforcing existing ordinances that require them in manufactured homes situated in trailer parks.
Lynch said, “The decision of whether or not to require automatic sprinkler systems for new or renovated residential development has been, and should remain, a local one. The State should not preempt local decision-making.”
He said the state fire marshal and local fire officials believe the flexibility on the issue should be left with local government. Without sprinklers as an option, towns will be forced to other possibly more expensive options like fire ponds, cisterns or greater distances between homes, Lynch said.
Lawmakers overrode Lynch’s veto of a similar bill, HB 109, last month. That bill, too, barred new fire suppression sprinkler ordinances, but did not block enforcement of existing rules.
Veto of HB 109 was overridden by a 294-72 vote in the House, and 17-6 in the Senate.
Speaker of the House William O’Brien ignored Lynch’s argument that local government should decide fire safety, and said the bill is meant to make housing more affordable. Mandatory sprinklers would impose “costly and ill-considered regulations” on builders, he said.
Noting the override of the HB 109 veto, O’Brien said, “We are sad to see that he chose to continue to make the same bad decision on this bill.”
House Majority Leader D.J. Bettencourt, R-Salem, said, “Our housing industry needs a jump start, not a kick in the gut.”