And what if we just say NO? (Addended again)

George Rebane

[This the transcript of the 19nov2010 edition of my bi-weekly KVMR-FM 89.5 commentary.  Today's cartoon in the 20nov2010 Union by my friend RL 'Bob' Crabb is on the same topic.  It is here purloined by permission.]

This week I attended the November luncheon meeting of the Nevada County Republican Women Federated, of which I am an Associate Member.  These women are by far the most dynamic and active conservative Republican group in the county.

Supervisor John Spencer was the featured speaker this month, and he chose to give us a Glenn Beckian whiteboard presentation of highlights of the county’s political history over the last twenty years.  It was an excellent summary that ended with an alarming report of the next layer of regulations coming down from state that will cost us more money and reduce our freedoms.

Supervisor John told us of the new state mandate to have all new construction housing in California incorporate inside sprinkler systems.  These new systems will add at least $10,000 to the cost of a house and promise to provide a goodly fraction of their owners with a wet surprise now and then.  The new code calls for the sprinklers not necessarily to put out any insipient fires, but to provide a ‘mist’ that may enable occupants to evacuate the premises.

Sacramento is requiring all the local jurisdictions to modify their building codes to require the incorporation of these sprinkler systems.  And if a jurisdiction, like Nevada County, chooses not to modify their building code, then by state law it will no longer be allowed to issue building permits.  In essence its planning and building departments would be shut down.

The younger listeners to this broadcast will not remember nor have they been taught in state schools the level of freedoms we enjoyed in days of yore.  These folks and those who have not been paying attention will barely notice or take note of the ratchet on our collars tightening another click – it has all happened so gradually.  But there it is again - for our own good of course.  Who would be so foolish as to say no to fire safety?

And maybe next year they’ll make us even safer by requiring that no house may be sold without the retrofit of such sprinkler systems.  Now that may be a $20 to 30,000 bill.  But remember, you can’t be too safe.  And not to worry, if you’re among the government favored economic class, you will have your retrofit subsidized by the unfavored class.

Our freedoms have been whittled down bit by piece for the better part of the 20th century, and now we have kicked the whole process into high gear.  The history of tyrannies is replete with stories of ‘we never knew it could wind up like this so fast’.  Check it out for yourself, talk to your neighbors about what it was like then compared to now.

Supervisor Spencer wound up his talk by announcing that the Board of Supervisors would have this sprinkler mandate on its agenda real soon now.  Moreover, there is nothing we can do about it except adopt its provisions.  And therefore the county’s building codes would be appropriately modified to require sprinklers on all new construction.  That’s just the way things are these days, every sunrise comes with more regulations.

After his talk I asked John, what would happen if the Supervisors voted to reject the state mandate on sprinklers.  He confirmed that under state law our building department could not issue any more building permits.  But then what would happen if someone built a house to pre-sprinkler code and moved in?  Would the governor call out the National Guard or the local SWAT team to evict the homeowner?  Would they tear down the house or confiscate it or … ?  John said he didn’t know because no one had thought to explore that possibility.  We have always done whatever they tell us to do, no matter what.

I’m sure the news media would cover such a rebellious act in which a small county finally says to big government that ‘enough is enough!’.  Could just saying NO catch on?  Would it spread like wildfire across the state?  Across the nation?  Would people start waking up?

I am George Rebane and I also expand on these and other themes in my Union columns, on NCTV, and on georgerebane.com where this transcript appears.  These opinions are not necessarily shared by KVMR.  Thank you for listening.

[20nov2010 addendum]

 

[11dec2010 addendum] A regular RR reader who is in the know about these things sent me the following chart that indicates what has been going on in Nevada County regarding residential construction.  It sure looks like the new additions to the building code will achieve total victory for the 'no growthers'.

 

Comments

[Jeff Peline]

This is a ridiculous argument, based on anti-government ideologues. We live in a forest. With that, comes some responsibility. It sure beats a new house with sprinklers in Palm Desert. Plus, lots of "used" homes on the market that don't require sprinklers if you want. In fact, the inventory is huge! Next up: We all subsidize the people who bought homes with septic tanks that need upgrading in our county. How much is that county-wide sewer plant going to cost those of us who bought in the incorporated towns of our county because we "knew better."

[Russ Steele]

My guess this new state mandate for fire sprinklers is not widely know by the public, and for the BOS to challenge the State they would need overwhelming support for that decision from citizens in the County. Other than your radio commentary on KVMR, the only other mention in local media was on KNCO here and here.

I find it interesting that the purpose of the sprinklers are only to provide covering mist for home owners to exit the house. I thought that was what the smoke detectors were for. First it was a smoke detector in a central area, then it became smoke detectors in and out side bedrooms, plus one in an central area. Now it is sprinklers in new houses, if we follow the pattern set for smoke detectors, we will soon be retrofitting sprinklers in esisting homes. When will the nanny government control of our lives stop.

My home is the woods is more vulnerable to fire from out side the home, then inside. We have sprinklers, but they are on the roof were the real danger is, not in the ceiling.

It is time for citizens to take a stand against excessive government intrusion in our lives. Call your supervisor and let him know you are supporting his NO decision. Phone #: Telephone: 530-265-1480
Toll-free: 1-888-785-1480 (within Nevada County only) Fax: 530-265-9836

Supervisors's E-mails:
John Spencer ,
Ed Scofield ,
Nate Beason ,
Ted Owens ,
Hank Weston

If you feel stongly about this issue, now is the time for action -- email or call NOW!

[Russ Steele]

Oops the BOS e-mails did not link:

Supervisors's E-mails:
John Spencer [email protected]>,
Ed Scofield <[email protected]>,
Nate Beason <[email protected]>,
Ted Owens <[email protected]>,
Hank Weston <[email protected]>

[Bob Hobert]

George - Forgive me but I edited your radio show transcript a little to send to my knee-jerk lib/dem friends so they would actually read it (I removed the hated names). I sent the original to my free-thinking list. This state has gone insane, and the crazies are running it. JP, those were anti-government ideologues that tore down the Berlin Wall, just for a modern reference. Earlier ones date to 1776. Next, AB32 and Obamacare.

[Jeff Pelline]

BTW, The Union ran a front page story on this, siding with the contractors. I also wrote about it.

[George Rebane]

Jeff, my point about the sprinkler mandate was not whether or not we need internal sprinklers. If we here in the mountains decide we need them, we are perfectly capable of incorporating an appropriate addition to our building code. We do not need to be told by Sacramento, or Washington, or the UN, or Intergalactic HQ what we should put into our building code. In short, the argument is where to draw the line in continuing to succumb to burdensome orders from on high. We were a free country with great latitude to determine how we managed our own affairs at the local level.

It is, of course, clear that the progressives have subverted such freedoms and argue for increasing these constraints.

[RL Crabb]

Do they have sprinklers in the Capitol? Our legislators are in need of a cold shower.

[Jeff Peline]

George,
Yes, sometimes we do need to be "told" by the experts in our government, just like we need to be told by our professors that we don't understand the subject matter. Wish somebody "told us" about providing a sewer infrastructure in our county, for example. Seems the contractors and real estate agents got the better of the rest of us on that one, huh?

[Barry Pruett]

Whose experts? History is rife with "experts" telling people how to behave, what to do, where to live. If I am not mistaken, that is why my ancestors left Europe. So Jeff, when the newly-elected experts in Congress start telling you liberals what to do, I suppose that they (as experts) will have your complete support? LOL.

[D. King]

I wonder how long before they demand
access to your home to inspect the
fire system?

[Jeff Peline]

Barry,
On the sprinkler issue, I happily defer to the fire suppression experts in my government. I value my family's life and theirs and find the "risk reward" analysis satisfactory.

[Barry Pruett]

Then you should have the choice to install one. Others should not be forced.

[Russ Steele]

@ D. King, Yes, and test it!

Sorry, I missed the article in the Union, but how many people know and are concerned about the requirement for sprinklers in new homes?

[D. King]

Hey Jeff, after you get your sprinklers installed, you can go for a ride.

http://tinyurl.com/26csr3f

[RL Crabb]

In answer to the sewer question, a few years ago there was an effort to build a "super sewer" system to serve (I believe) the Alta Sierra/LOP area. It was squashed by the Supes, who feared it would lead to development.

[Dixon Cruickshank]

Jeff its kinda like the neighbor that just discovered God - your glad for him but you don't really want to hear about it that much - do you get the point?

[D. King]

You know, the more I think about this
the worse it sounds. Using misters with
manky water, that will be inhaled, is not
so smart.

[Steve Frisch]

Yeah what do we really need a Uniform Building Code (now an IBC) for anyway? Why would the consumer of housing give a damn if there were some uniform standards on things like burn rates for drywall, or door widths? We here in Nevada County should be able to do it whatever way we want! After all as a consumer I am perfectly capable of judging the quality of a home that is constructed: I can stand around with the contractor and inspect it every week or so myself; I have e-xray vision so I can look into the walls and know that the appropriate sized pipe was used for the plumbing.

We here in Nevada County don't need to come up with a rational system to protect the consumer we will count on the good graces and high honor of our contractors.

[Barry Pruett]

Thanks for the hyperbole. LOL. Nobody is suggesting that we go from the extreme views of Pelline and Frisch re hyper-regulation to another extreme (no regulation), but what Pelline and Frisch suggest is erroring on the side of over-regualtion instead of on the side of personal freedom. You "middle of the roaders" need to get off the left side of the road and get back to the middle. There needs to be balance...and things are highly out of balance.

As we head down the slope of hyper-regulation, when does rational regulation become a highly overbearing government? Just a hint to the answer: California has become that highly overbearing government...so maybe we should ask when CA crossed the line.

[Barry Pruett]

This week from Russ we learned that global warming is about government control and redistribution of wealth - Frisch supports wholeheartedly this approach. Pelline wants "experts" to tell us what to do. You see my friends, the leftist (Frisch and Pelline) want liberals to control our actions. Others (including me) want balance betweem regulation and freedom and want us to err on the side of personal freedom. Since when did personal freedom, a theme upon which our country was founded, become extreme? It became extreme the day the leftist "rhetoric" started.

[Steve Frisch]

Okay so if that's the case, and you decide what rules you want to follow, there is no UBC. Your position is completely illogical.

[Barry Pruett]

The regulations need to err on the side of personal freedom. Meaning that many of them should not exist. Nobody is suggesting the individual gets to chose which ones to follow. The error is occurring at the regualtion's inception.

[Bob Hobert]

Barry, personal freedom is only for the strongest and most capable -those who do not need or desire to be told by experts how to run their lives. Those willing to be told also aspire to tell their imagined inferiors how to run their lives. The more rules and rulers the happier the weak are. Everything is then so....orderly. Left, left, left right left. That chant reflects how our country has been turning the past 90 years. If you diagram those turns you see that you end going nowhere. There's the pity.

[Mikey McD]

"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniencies attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." Thomas Jefferson

Gents, you can't get progressives to value personal liberty, it gets in the way of their worship of government. The logic function of their brain was overtaken by emotions and fantasy in their youth. They will FORCE on us the UBC, $50k septics, $10k sprinklers, etc and then bitch about affordable housing (the dis-connect would be comical if it did not infringe on my liberty). The reliance on government (UBC's, health care, SS, etc) proves my point- the progressives themselves don't think they are smart enough to live their own lives without directives from a government planner/bureaucrat.

[Mikey McD]

The progressives also fail to understand that burdensome regulations (jobs requiring union labor, UBC codes, other planning comm demands) hurt the lower income citizens the most via rental increases and high home prices. They fail to see that old homes won't be renovated due to fear of 'letting the planners into the home to make demands.' Thus, houses which would have improved electrical, roofing, etc will not, which increases risk of fire, mold, etc.

"Those who put their trust in government(s) get what they deserve"- common sense

[Steven Frisch]

My point is that if we "just say no" we no longer have the benefit of a UBC. It is nice to say the regulation needs to err on the side of personal freedom, but you alone can not define where to draw the line. If you draw the line at sprinkler's then what's to keep you from drawing the line at 3/4 inch pipe?

We live in a "society". The definition of a society is that we seek common agreement and compromise to reach accords to govern ourselves, so we can achieve more. If one individual has the power to say no, and block the rest of the societies ability to say yes, then we have no society. We live next to each other, and if your house burns, mine might to, and if your house burns my insurance rates go up, and if your house burns, my tax dollars are used to fight the fire, and if your house is sold I need to have some expectations that it meets certain standards. If I have to suffer the consequences of your actions I have a right to have some say over your actions. That is what a society is.

What is illogical in the approach George proposes is that it fails to consider the long term consequences of the actions, both on the taxpayer and on the decision-making process. It is all about instant gratification.

And when an idea is challenged, as I did above, Mr. Pruett resorts to claiming I personally support government control and redistribution of wealth. Barry, I did not direct my comments to you personally, I addressed the issue. Why did you direct a personal attack on what you claim, inaccurately, I believe? This is why your blogs always deteriorate into name calling and wasted time.

Reading the blogs of ill repute in the county in the last two weeks, from NC Media Watch, to Rebane's Rumination's to Sierra Dragon's Breathe (sic), to Inside Nevada County Politics, just reminds me of what a colossal waste of time it is to engage on them.

[Todd Juvinall]

Regarding the sewer. I am unaware of what Pelline is talking about. I do know Joel Gustafson, a Supe elected when I was, tried to get the ball moving on a regional sewer plant in the mid 80's and was trashed by the eco nuts. He was a liberal professor and it was interesting to see and hear the names the eco nuts called him then. Same as today.

Regarding sprinklers, I was required to put them into houses I built in a certain subdivision in the unincorporated area of the county. The rule was a demand by the Fire District Captain during the subdivision process. Do it or we will fight approval was the tact. So, I had to install them at about 10k per house.I do not like water in pipes over my head because they will always leak sometime. Anyway, the requirement is on top of the many thousands of rules we are forced to abide by on our own property. Toilets, siding, roofing, electrical fixtures, overhangs, every single aspect of your property. These feel good measures which only seem to make the bureaucrat feel good, have become anti-constitutional and fascist in their affect.

[Steve Enos]

"John Spencer was the featured speaker this month, and he chose to give us a Glenn Beckian whiteboard presentation of highlights of the county’s political history over the last twenty years."

Did Spencer include the last election in his "political history" review where the voters of District 3 fired him and elected Terry Lamphier?

[Steve Enos]

Fire safety???

It was Spencer that pushed to reduce fire road access standards over the objections for firefighters. And why do our conservative Supes think it great to build houses all you want in designated extreme fire danger zones, reduce the fire safety road standards, add more second units in high/extreme zones without secondary road access improvements and reduce the fire safety/fuel reduction standards supported by firefighters?

Maybe that is why sprinklers are a good idea.

[Mikey McD]

Todd, I am living in one of the homes you built which required sprinklers. I see a MUCH higher probability of the sprinklers leaking/flooding the home than I do fire protection ("I do not like water in pipes over my head because they will always leak sometime"). Thankfully, the sprinkler system as an on/off switch. It sucks that I had to pay for a sprinkler system which I have since disabled just over a power trip in some dark government office.

[Todd Juvinall]

I didn't know you bought it. What happened to Bill and Ida?

[Mikey McD]

No idea.

[George Rebane]

I’m sad to say that our liberal contingent in this thread is again defending a hill that is not assaulted. Perhaps the notions of too many, too often, too foolish, too expensive, and generally too burdensome from government is too difficult to grasp. Instead, it all must be reduced down to some simpleton black and white issue – here, ‘Rebane is against Uniform Building Codes.’

But they may have a point in complaining about RR. There are many blogs available that purvey easier to understand material. Nevertheless, the ongoing attempts by the progressive mind to make sense of these scribblings continues to be appreciated.

[D. King]

George,

They’re inexorably drawn to your artful traps.

http://tinyurl.com/288k3lv

[David Moyer]

I think there is a broader point at issue here. Who is to gain by such a ridiculous nanny regulation and who is rewarded for passing it? Don't think for a minute that our health and safety is a motivating factor here.

If every county board of supervisors agreed to just say no what is the state going to do?

At least there is probably no major downside for this intrusion except for the expense and the sometime destruction of property when the pipes freeze or otherwise break, but that will be good for the plumbing trade. Folks would be amazed to learn of the risks caused by federal and state mandates to protect us, whether those risks are due to toxins used in furniture, clothing, pesticides, vaccinations, GMO foods and radiation. These are but a few samples of nanny state regulations imposed upon us daily without the consent of the governed.

[Steven Frisch]

George, the point I am making is that if you pick and chose which section of the UBC you like, and suggest we should just say no to the portions we don't like, then you end up with none of the UBC...that is the natural extension of what you are suggesting.

Otherwise you are just fantasizing...or engaging in some other form of self gratification.

[George Rebane]

Well said David.

No SteveF, it is neither the practice you outline nor the natural extension. The sprinkler mandate is not yet in our UBC. Nowhere do I advise not following the existing UBC. I am however advising a more rigorous approach to incorporating NEW provisions to the UBC, and rejecting those that make no sense to local jurisdictions. The natural extension of such behavior would start us on the road to restoring local control and individual liberties.

[Larry Wirthy]

George, I can't resist chipping in with a cautionary tale from my own experience as a designer/builder of restaurant kitchens..

Back in '76, I built a Rusty Scupper kitchen on the fifth floor of a 19th Century brick warehouse that was being rescued from by oblivion by re-innovation. Since the internal framing was timber, the whole thing had to have fire sprinklers. Somehow, the local pipefitters union had made the sprinklers also mandatory in the walk-in coolers and freezers, as if uncooked stored food would burn.

Now, walk-in freezers are entered and left frequently, and that lets in humidity. So they have to be programmed to occasionaly go on a defrost cycle where the refr system is turned off and heaters are turned on to melt accumulated ice on the cooling coils, which goes down a drain pipe provided for the purpose.

So the local union electrician made a small mistake; he wired the time clock so that when the heaters came on as they were supposed to, the power to the time clock was cut off.

Naturally, in a superbly insulated space, the heat build-up set off the sprinklers, which first filled the freezer with water, and then proceeded to leak down thru the floors below which housed the Rhode Island state employee medical records.

Naturally, as the supplier of the walk-in freezer, I was called upon to explain. It wasn't much fun figuring it out, but at the end of the day someone else caught the blame. L

[Steven Frisch]

The California IBC update is already approved and going into effect January 1, 2011-- So good luck with that Georgie--I amazed at the similarity between my friends over here on the fantasy side of the web and Don Quixote.

And I love the story--I guess the thousands of people a year saved by sprinklers should take heed form this little anecdotal ditty and reject sprinklers because one moron made a mistake somewhere.

How silly!

[Mikey McD]

Larry, your story depicts one of the many problems with central planning. Though I would not trust anyone in Sac or Washington to watch my cat for the weekend I am supposed to believe that they understand complex systems. Instead we know that they make decisions in a vacuum which you and I must follow; regardless of how stupid. I don't get paid to take away the liberty of my neighbors so...

[Todd Juvinall]

There are too many laws. Everyone is a lawbreaker, What Frisch and his leftwing pals like is more laws. They can then become the masters and the arbiters of others lives (the dream fulfilled by 60's radicals). Pretty simple. I have seen every excuse known to man to lord over others with the Supreme Courts ruling the government can pretty mush do anything to us as long as they configure it as a "health and safety" reason. This allows the "police" powers to be invoked. So, unless we bring reason back to any law, we get this crap.

[Barry Pruett]

Frisch: What will you and your liberal "experts" impose upon us next?

[Larry Wirth]

Frisch: Anecdotal, indeed, but hardly a "ditty." As liberals are wont to do, you missed the underlying point, to wit: What the hell does anybody need with sprinkler heads in walk-in freezers where, (in case you missed the point) there is nothing to burn?

Another point: folks who spend their waking hours on their blackberries, i-phones or watching Joy and the sisters-name your poison- some of us have things in our homes that are far more likely to be damaged by a "misting" sprinkler malfunction than by fire. Say mint stamps in my collection that like dry.

Point is, if you want to spend the money to have fire sprinklers over your bed, fine. But resist the progressive inclination to assume that one size fits all and if you choose to make yourself impoverished and miserable, then everyone else had damn well be prepared to be made equally miserable. You, and your kind of thinking, make sane people upchuck. L

[Account Deleted]

Barry, good luck getting an answer. One thing I have found is that it is very hard to get any kind of answer out of the Libs.
Over the last year or so, I have asked for clarification on several points and have never gotten the courtesy of reply. I find the replies to GB's posts to be far more interesting than the original topic. Observe how fanatic they are about something as simple as the UBC. I personally feel that if I want to build a house in the woods I have only the responsibility to make sure that I don't tap into some one's water supply and that my effluent does not leave the border of my property. I am building it and my interests lie in having a safe well built home. If Jeff P or anyone else doesn't like that, too bad, it doesn't directly affect them. I will simply have an inexpensive home that costs far less than theirs and will be far more energy efficient and much more attractive to boot. If they don't want to buy a non UBC home, then they don't have to. If the bank won't loan money for a buyer, then I'll finance it myself. If it burns to the ground, I'll just build another. I won't pick another man's pocket to do so. I realize my position is not that of most sheeples as they prefer to let others think for them and are happy to be ordered about. The trouble lies in that they are jealous of the the others that prefer not to live in that cage and they can only act in ways to make others suffer along side them. Taking risks and suffering the consequences are the hall mark of this nation's ascendancy. The nanny state is now closing in and we will all suffer the decline. As far as a cost to benefit ratio involving this new rule, has anyone factored in the extra cost of the loan - the extra state and fed taxes that have to be paid on the income to pay for the sprinkler system? With the new VAT tax, there will be even more cost. All so a handful of alcoholics that smoke in bed will be saved. Then they live and cause even more damage and havoc in society. Where are the savings? Water sprinklers have been available for decades. The sheeples that cheer this new burden on our lives have never even considered putting a system in the home they live in. Suddenly they are quite sure we all need them. Also, what is the carbon footprint of the massive extra expenditure of funds to pay for all of this? Capital will need to be re-directed from other areas. What about the loss in those areas? Never factored in or even considered. What we need is the ability to have areas that can opt out and after 10 years or so do a full cost analysis on the competing sides. But that's not really the point, is it? Just pass more feel good laws to take our minds off of the fact that the state is seriously mis-managed and in debt for decades.

[Steven Frisch]

Man Larry, I used to design kitchen's for major restaurant development firms. I did it with an architect, because I'm not one, but in a fire a walk in will burn, as will a freezer. The idea behind sprinklers is so anathema to you guys, but no one has addressed the core point, when I have to spend money to protect your friggin' property it costs me money. Not cool. You all juts want something for free.

You are all idiots..pure and simple.

Barry, what will you impose on me next. I have to pay for your kids, your fire suppression, your roads, your external costs of what you call your freedom; all while you whine about paying your fair share...you are all irresponsible babies looking for a hand out.

[Larry Wirth]

Steven, your comments, perhaps, speak for themselves. I also worked with architects, engineers, public health workers, fire authorities and many other public agencies in 28 years of building commercial kitchen facilities. No rocket science involved...

Before I'll fully credit your comments, show me your resume...you should know better than to say some of the things above said.

Yes, subject to enough external heat, walk-ins (don't know why you would distinguish between coolers and freezers) can burn, if the external fire is hot enough.

Modern walk-ins are made up of modular (and custom) panels with urethane foam sandwiched between aluminum and/or stainless steel skins. Typically, the skin must reach melting point before the insulation within will burn, and even then, only fitfully. However, the fire doesn't start inside the walk-in; how could it?

I didn't even hint that sprinklers in a 150 year-old building in Providence, RI shouldn't be installed; indeed they certainly should be, particularly on the top floor! What I said was that they weren't needed inside a walk-in freezer. Verstehen zie?

That particular screw-up by an electrician cost the taxpayers of Providence and Rhode Island literally millions of dollars, just because some union had been able to impose it's "rent-seeking" agenda on the local building officials.

For the rest of you, this is just my effort to put paid to the purported ideas of eco-fascists. L

[Larry Wirth]

Sorry George, "zie" should have been "sie," but I digress. Intersting that you should have so many "fans" who vehemently disagree with what you have to say. I think that's a good thing. L

[Barry Pruett]

"Barry, what will you impose on me next. I have to pay for your kids, your fire suppression, your roads, your external costs of what you call your freedom; all while you whine about paying your fair share...you are all irresponsible babies looking for a hand out."

Frisch: So your answer is to take away the freedoms? Further, we all agree that we need to take care of certain things collectively - defense, police/fire, roads. My problem with your views is that you are turing the nation into a collective - your views are too extreme. America is about balance between freedom and government. American was foundeed on limited government and has thrived.

"Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state, an intolerable one." - Thomas Paine

[Steven Frisch]

Larry, I don't know your resume either. For all I know you are bullsh*tting. WE have to trust each other a little here to actually have a conversation. BUt I don't think anyone here is interested in a conversation.

I was a professionally trained chef, who worked for a restaurant company in San Diego that went from one base restaurant to 9 locations in 6 years. My job as executive chef was to work with the restaurant designers to lay out the kitchen, including all equipment, location of equipment, electrical and plumbing needs, and code compliance. I am not an architect, but I worked directly with one to achieve our expansion. I then helped design two more kitchens for another company in La Jolla. 10 kitchen designs in 10 years. Every single one had a sprinkler in the coolers and freezer. I have never worked in a large commercial kitchen in California that does not have a sprinkler in the cooler. In more than 20 years in the restaurant business I have never once heard of any person in my field have a problem with a sprinkler in a cooler.

The core issue here is not the design of commercial kitchens.

The core issue is that you guys are complaining about a nanny state, while wanting to live in a baby state.

up

[Barry Pruett]

"The core issue is that you guys are complaining about a nanny state, while wanting to live in a baby state."

This makes no sense.

[RL Crabb]

Steve, I don't think anyone here is arguing that there shouldn't be standards for new construction. Sprinklers for some new buildings, especially multi-story apartments, etc., makes sense. But the continual piling on of "one size fits all" regs for single family residences has reached the point of absurdity. Having spent years watching planning commissions in action, I've seen the abuses first hand.

Right now, I am experiencing such stupidity. Years ago, when the GV planning commission approved an apartment building next to our home, they demanded that the owner plant a row of trees in between the properties so we wouldn't be looking into each others bedrooms. Never mind that the roots will crack his foundation in another few years, and that last night's snowstorm has placed one of them on my roof, the "experts" knew better.

Consider too, that all new "affordable" housing has just gone up $10K in price. If nothing else, the housing bubble provided some relief in that regard, if you're lucky enough to have a job and a bank that will finance it.

[Account Deleted]

Steve - could you give an example of what we conservatives want for "free"? Because it looks to me that it's the other way around. For example, conservatives have to pay for free public education that is, for the most part total crap and a waste of money. And we have to pay, again (and after taxes) for a good private school for our own kids. How is that free loading? I have to save and pay for a house I can afford and pay for the greedy fools that knowingly bought homes they knew they could not afford. Who's free loading? I pay for my own vehicles and I have to subsidize folks that have more income than I so they can buy their "green" vehicles. I'm free loading? Tell me how. I want and will pay for a strong, but limited govt that abides by the Constitution, but I will not stand to pay for waste, incompetence, illegal acts and lazy bums. Do you have a problem with that? And how does removing my liberties make things better?

[Larry Wirth]

OK, Steve, you showed yours,I'll show mine. Went to work in '69 for Surfas, Inc. in LA. By '73 was head kitchen designer there. In '79, took off with the top sales guy to form the Kitchen Intelligence Agency in Santa Monica.

I was the kitchen design guy you used to consult with, tho mostly my contact was with owners. Over the next 19 years I designed and built over 400 commercial kitchen is thirty five states. Clients included Borel Restaurant Corp (Rusty Scuppers, Parker's Lighthouses), Spectrum Foods (Il Fornaio, Prego), Cheesecake Factory, Chin-Chin, Crocodile Cafes, Chuck's Steak Houses, Alderman Enterprises (Carlos'n'Pepe, Margaritaville), Ogilvies in New Mexico and Colorado, T&S Restaurants (Kimos, Lelanis, Duke's Canoe Club, Sharkey's, Keoki's, Jakes at Tahoe and Del Mar), Roy Yamaguchi's restaurants in Hawaii, and hundreds of one-offs as well. Gladstones, Camacho's, Hebrew Union College, Palm Canyon Hotel, the Palms at Wailea, and on and on.

Total equipment sales and installation over those 19 years, 90+ million. So, yeah, I know what I'm talking about when I say walk-ins don't need sprinklers- there's nothing to burn.

[Larry Wirth]

Forgot to mention Hamburger Hamlets (Marilyn Lewis would be offended) across the US. But, nevermind. My larger point is that commercial kitchen builders, like most successful enterprises, are the product of people who have devoted their professional lives to bringing these things to life, are liable for the results, and are rarely, if ever, overmatched in knowledge by the presumably well-intentioned agents of the Leviathan. For what it's worth, the KIA, over 19 years, was never subjected to a lawsuit, though a fire occured in a kitchen I built in Lahaina, but ultimately attributed to a lack of maintainence on the part of the owner/operators who relied upon local input.

[Todd Juvinall]

Larry, Steve has rent seeker guilt, RSG. They project on to th people that actually work and know things.

[Mikey McD]

Gents, you can't get progressives to value personal liberty (or employ reason/logic), it gets in the way of their worship of government. You can, however, accept victory when they start name calling...

"You are all idiots." Posted by: Steven Frisch | 20 November 2010 at 09:26 PM

It is ironic to have a government dependent human to label as idiots those yearning for freedom to be self reliant. An idiot NEEDS a nanny government (at the expense of the self reliant).

[Dixon Cruickshank]

"George, the point I am making is that if you pick and chose which section of the UBC you like, and suggest we should just say no to the portions we don't like, then you end up with none of the UBC...that is the natural extension of what you are suggesting."

Why is it that when confronted the lib/progressive has to always go "extreme" - its either you submit to a 10K regulation or its everyman for himself and anarchy???? - NOT ONE PERSON remotely suggested anything close.

exit question: if they are so good and so badly needed to save lives I presume you and peeline both have them installed - if not why not, do you not care about the safety of your families ???

or are you just so worried about others families

PS I'm sure you also put one inside the frig too, in a fire the best way to find the kitchen is look for the freezer, it will still be there - I guess flipping burgers doesn't qualify you to design kitchens, talk about being OWNED in an epic way hehe

[Dixon Cruickshank]

Mikey forgot to give you kudo's for a good post:

"It is ironic to have a government dependent human to label as idiots those yearning for freedom to be self reliant. An idiot NEEDS a nanny government (at the expense of the self reliant).

and as such Mr frisch who is actually paying for barry's fire protection and kids, the same people that pay you through grants - just say'in

[Paul Emery]

Anyone know if Giovannis restaurant in Colfax had sprinklers? You could probably find out by sifting through the ashes

[George Rebane]

Paul, apropos to this post, where would you go with that argument given that they did or not have sprinklers.

[Steven Frisch]

Idiots...

[Barry Pruett]

When liberals resort to name-calling you know they have no valid argument. Woo hoo...I win!

[Dixon Cruickshank]

WOO

[Greg Goodknight]

I think Frisch forgot to mention his degree in Political Science. About as impressive as being a cook.

No one in my family smokes. I suspect our risk for a fire is much less than in an apartment building where many Democrats and undocumented Democrats are renting low income housing. Sprinklers would be a good idea there to protect the non-smokers from the smokers.

My home doesn't have sprinklers, nor do I think I need them. Like others, the danger here is from fires on the outside. However, since new homes will have to have them, and no one shopping for homes will care that this place doesn't have them, this new law will eventually boost the value of my home by something close to 10K. Let's also boost the fees for new construction while we're at it. It might kill more construction jobs, but I think Frisch is OK with that.

[Larry Wirth]

Greg, that was ironic in a personal sense. While my above posted brief resume was completely accurate, it is curious that my own degree from UCLA is in political science. Spent 2-1/2 years in the College of Engineering, then Army, back to school, 2 years in Lib Art, back in Army (reservist called up), back to graduate in Poli Sci: but married, and drafting was what people would pay for; planned on Law School, but boss made, in his own words "an offer your can't resist." He was right, money beckoned more than law school and a die was cast...

[Dixon Cruickshank]

Yes Paul I would also like to inquire as to where that would be going - its a commercial building with open flames, maybe it did or didn't - the point?

this is about a house - we have a gazillion of them in this country none with sprinklers -
it ain't helping if a forest fire roars through, you should have been gone already

[Paul Emery]

I was just curious as to whether sprinklers were effective in that case. Apparently in the recent Galleria fire they were turned off allowing a small fire to get out of control. Here's another question that I don't have an answer to. If Nevada County were to become a Charter County would they still be under the same Universal Building Code rules? Anybody know?

[Paul Emery]

I was just curious as to whether sprinklers were effective in that case. Apparently in the recent Galleria fire they were turned off allowing a small fire to get out of control. Here's another question that I don't have an answer to. If Nevada County were to become a Charter County would they still be under the same Universal Building Code rules? Anybody know?

[George Rebane]

Just got an email from Supervisor John Spencer who reported that the BoS did indeed meet this morning and passed the inclusion of the new sprinkler regulation into our building code. The vote was 3-2 with Supervisors Spencer and Owens (Truckee) voting NO. Maybe the vote indicates a beginning of some pushback on state-sponsored idiocies.

[Todd Juvinall]

Paul, I think Placer County is a charter ounty. You could call and talk to Tom Miller, their CEO, We hired him way back as our DOT leader and he left after a few years of being hounded by the left in the county.

[Paul Emery]

That would be good information to know. I'll check into it. Actually, Grass Valley is a Charter City. Draconian building codes have been a pet peeve of mine for years so I might stand near you on this one.
A friend of mine who built his own house told me that they would not give a ok on his final inspection because he used a custom made toilet seat that was not sealed with the proper plastic coating. That's one step beyond having the government in your bedroom

[Mikey McD]

Check out Today's Union... $100k sprinkler system required for bike shop... Oh how we wish we could just say "NO." That's a lot of bikes for $100,000!

http://www.theunion.com/article/20101129/NEWS/101129791/1066&ParentProfile=1053
"The construction project faced an unexpected hurdle when the Department of the State Architect mandated a fire sprinkler system in the building. Because water pressure was too low, the school had to pay for hook-ups to NID.

At a price tag well over $100,000, the sprinkler system chewed into the $400,000 of the donation earmarked for operational expenses. Classes, which enroll 80 students at a time, moved into the building in October."