Comments for

Comment on House Passes HB 377 by Curt

Curt — Sun, 20 Mar 2011 18:45:05 +0000

Greg I have to disagree with you but the facts are out in public that our elected officals were bought by special interest groups. Just go to http://www.campaignfinance.state.pa.us/ReportSearch.aspx and you will see that our elected officals were bought by special interest groups. I personally feel that the elected officials also played games with us last year. They made it look like they were supportive of the sprinkler code and received the votes from the fire service in November when they were up for re-election and the lame duck session came and they had the same opportunity to kill sprinklers but refused to have the bill brought out of the house rules committee. Funny though that after the elected officals went back into session they went and pushed this bill through immediately. Lets see hmmmm we get the votes from the fire service to get re-elected and make them think we are all supportive of the fire service and turn around and take the money from the builders PAC’s and made the deal to push the removal through in the new session.

The house members and for that much everyone in Harrisburg has lost touch with the citizens and we still are not represented the way we need to be. Just look at the appointment on the Turnpike the past week. As for the Busing of fire service reps to the IRC meeting in Baltimore. Mr. Murphy this happened by the builders also. It happened by both sides. As for Homes being so safe you again are inccorect. As a volunteer firefighter I can tell you that the homes are very unsafe to the fire service. With lightweight construction the homes now days don’t stand up like the homes of older days. Go look at any house fire scene. A home with new construction and has heavy fire never stands after a fire where an older construction home will still be standing.

You are so right money does talk and that’s the issue with our elected officals. We need open minded elected officals who represent everyone and not just special interest groups or individuals with the most money.

Comment on How many lives must be taken before we realize that sprinklers WILL and DO SAVE LIVES? by Curt

Curt — Tue, 15 Mar 2011 19:40:08 +0000

Greg. First thank you for your reply on this matter. Now to answer some of your points. As for installing smoke detectors and replacing batteries annually I agree and even go one step further. These batteries should actually be replaced twice a year (Usually at the same time as you change your clocks). The issue with smoke detectors is that these items will alert you to the fire but will not contain a fire like sprinklers do. Just today a fire occured in an elderly apartment complex in Harrisburg City. Fire was reported to be visable from a window by several callers who reported this fire. By the time Harrisburg Bureau of Fire arrived the fire was out thanks to this building having active sprinklers in place.

Since the January 1, 2011 Pennsylvania has had a total of 42 deaths related to house fires. In some of these cases smoke detectors were in place and working at the time of the fire. Unfortunately these individuals still perished in the fire. If sprinklers are in place in new construction home we will cut down on these losses. It’s true that by having a smoke detector in place you do increase your chances of survival but for the firefighters it does nothing. Would you rather we just let you home burn and not put these dedicated volunteers at risk of death or serious injury due to not having sprinklers in your new home?

Comment on How many lives must be taken before we realize that sprinklers WILL and DO SAVE LIVES? by Blake Harrison

Blake Harrison — Mon, 14 Mar 2011 20:14:38 +0000

The sprinkler mandate exists because of lobbyists and a special interest group. The IRC Fire Sprinkler Coalition is a special interest group. The ICC would have never considered a mandate such as this back in 2008 without being strong armed by these lobbyists. The sprinker proposal was defeated quite a few times until the coalition was formed by firemen and inspectors.
I wonder how many of these off duty firemen will be installing $prinkler $ystem$? I wonder how many of these coalition members own sprinkler system companies? Not to worry, there's no new construction now anyway.
The unintended consequence of government meddling is always first and foremost, bigger government.. The government should be concerned with fixing its own house before mandating anything in mine.

Comment on How many lives must be taken before we realize that sprinklers WILL and DO SAVE LIVES? by Greg

Greg — Mon, 14 Mar 2011 01:22:07 +0000

The loss of any life in a fire is terrible. Passing HB377 wouldn’t have saved any of the 13 recently lost. Installing smoke detectors, and replacing batteries annually is the way to prevent the loss of more lives in existing home fires.

Were there operating smoke detectors in the homes where these 13 lost their lives?

Comment on House Passes HB 377 by Greg

Greg — Sat, 12 Mar 2011 04:43:06 +0000

Bought by special interest groups. Sorry, don’t think so.
We finally have a house that listened to the folks they represent.
If this was the result if special interests, what do you call bussing fire service reps to vote on the IRC code proposal.
This is a good bill. Homes built today are very safe. I can live with the requirement in multifamily. You can’t control what your neighbor does, and this may make sense for attached homes.
This bill will tell us how buyers value the systems. In a short time we’ll have the data, and it will support the actions taken by this House, and soon by the Senate.
Educated buyers will vote with their dollars. Those interested will ” opt in”.

Comment on House Passes HB 377 by Michael McClure

Michael McClure — Fri, 11 Mar 2011 18:53:17 +0000

"Votes can be bought"? Because you didn't get your way, you feel that the system is crooked. I am not a part of a special interest group-I am merely a family man wanting to build a home and not have my civil liberties infringed on by an overbearing government. I voiced my opinion to my representative in a clear and concise manner explaining why I felt so strongly against the mandate.-I didn't buy a vote. My representative listened to me, now isn't that how democracy is supposed to work? You know, the whole "for the people by the people" rhetoric. Saying that I bought a vote, which essentially you are, is very insulting. Just for the record, I have yet to see any study or documentation that is strong enough to make me sway my thoughts on installing a sprinkler system.

Comment on PA House Scheduled to Vote on HB 377 This Week. TELL YOUR ELECTED OFFICIALS TO VOTE NO!!!! by Curt

Curt — Tue, 08 Mar 2011 13:52:44 +0000

Unfortunately in this day and age we are always faced with things in life that we may not want to do but we have to adjust to these changes. I understand as a builder in a rural area that you are concerned about the possible effects that this code would have on you and your company but let’s look at the entire picture. In our neighboring states many local municipalities already have a sprinkler code and it’s not affecting the sell of land or the building of homes in these areas so why would you think it would in your area.

In East Pennsboro Twp where I live we have a builder who has been building houses and re-selling them and for the past 5 years he has required that each home have sprinklers installed. He hasn’t noticed a drop in business so I really don’t see how you would either. We are talking about a life dream and a life investment. Wouldn’t you want to help protect your life investment with sprinklers and help add to the protection available to your home and family? Sprinklers save lives and this has been shown in areas where they are now required and also via many studies by both the builders and the fire service.

To address your rural water concern also this is not hard or costly. The cost would be about $1,000 more to have a pressurized system put in place that would operate if you have a power failure. It’s an underground water take with a pressure system attached that will supply the water for sprinkler activation.

I hope this answers your questions and please feel free to contact me direct if you would like to discuss this further.

Comment on PA House Scheduled to Vote on HB 377 This Week. TELL YOUR ELECTED OFFICIALS TO VOTE NO!!!! by Jake Suprenick

Jake Suprenick — Thu, 03 Mar 2011 13:23:43 +0000

I am a prospective home builder in a rural area and I do not want this requirement and neither does anyone else. I own land and won't build if sprinklers are required. So essentially this bill will defraud me out of the use of my land costing me $100,000. No one will buy it to build on either. So you send me $100,000 and we'll call it even. Otherwise get rid of this requirement.

Comment on PA House Scheduled to Vote on HB 377 This Week. TELL YOUR ELECTED OFFICIALS TO VOTE NO!!!! by Michael McClure

Michael McClure — Tue, 01 Mar 2011 21:21:13 +0000

Dear Mr. Alleman,
I must respectfully disagree with you and your stance for a mandated sprinkler system in each new home construction. First, your estimated cost is way below what is reality. It is more in the area of $15,000 and above. Second, there is virtually no difference between the survival rates of house fires when proper smoke detectors and fire alarms are installed as compared to sprinkler systems (December issue of Popular Mechanics provides 99.4% vs. 99.6%, respectively). Survival is the key here, Mr. Alleman, as possessions can be replaced.
Furthermore, my family believes that preparation and planning in the event of an emergency such as a house fire will dictate our safety greater than a costly sprinkler system. At my family's current house, we have rope ladders at each window as well as ladders positioned outside the home that would allow for several different types of escape. We also have several escape routes, fire detectors and smoke alarms in each bedroom and on each level of our home, and fire extinguishers on each level. To me, this planning and preparation serves my family better than any imposed mandate from the government.
Finally, the mandate for sprinklers seems nothing more than another example of too much government involvement. My family has been planning to build a new home-one that we have taken extra jobs, sacrificed amenities, and cut corners to afford. The additional cost of this mandate that you support is stopping us from breaking ground. My wife and I know how to assess risk and safety-it just so happens to be our jobs. Above that, we have two children whom we cherish more than anything. If I believed that a sprinkler system would be the determining factor in keeping my children safe, I would want to be able to make that choice, not have it forced on me. It just so happens that I do not believe that a sprinkler system will keep my family safe; that is why I oppose and respectfully disagree with your stance. I say vote yes, absolutely yes to House Bill 377 to repeal the mandate so that my wife and I can make the choice to take on such an expense, or to build our home, help the housing market, and be the deciders for OUR safety, OUR lives, and OUR home.
Sincerely,
Michael McClure

Comment on Alleman Addresses Custodial and Maintenance Staff Cuts at East Pennsboro by Curt

Curt — Tue, 16 Nov 2010 17:22:57 +0000

When this topic was originally put onto the agenda I was unaware that it was to remove the staff as East Pennsboro SD employees. I unfortunately had to work that evening due to using a good deal of my time off for contract negotiations with the collective bargining unit.