Committee hears bill to bar SDC increases tied solely to sprinkler-required larger water meters

The House Committee on Housing and Homelessness opened a public hearing March 3 on House Bill 3505 (dash 2), which would prevent local governments from charging the incremental SDC that results when a larger water meter is required only for an NFPA 13D residential fire sprinkler system.

The bill’s sponsors and agency witnesses said the amendment is a narrow fix intended to remove what they called an unintentional disincentive to install residential sprinklers, which they described as a life‑safety measure and a tool for supporting denser, infill housing.

Milana Cox, administrator of the Building Codes Division at the Oregon Department of Consumer and Business Services, told the committee, “the building codes division supports this amendment, which is a narrow fix designed to remove an unintentional disincentive to install residential sprinklers.” Cox explained that some SDC methodologies treat a larger meter sized for sprinkler flow as creating extra system impact even though residential sprinklers have no daily water‑use impact.

Claire McGrew, chief deputy at the Oregon Department of State Fire Marshal, said the department supports the dash‑2 amendment and described the change as “very narrow in scope and directly connected to residential fire sprinkler requirements through NFPA 13D.” McGrew emphasized that sprinklers “help to keep the fire from growing and do allow occupants precious time to escape.”

Sean Olsen, legislative chair of the Oregon Fire Marshals Association, highlighted evidence on safety: “According to the United States Fire Administration, when both fire sprinklers and smoke alarms are present, fire deaths are reduced by 82 percent.” Olsen urged elimination of SDCs tied only to sprinkler‑required upsized meters to lower cost barriers.

Industry and municipal technical witnesses from the Oregon Building Officials Association, Oregon Home Builders Association, and local water‑utility staff said they generally support the narrow fix but noted it does not prevent a local government from charging for a larger meter when that meter is needed for other uses. Scott Berry of the Oregon Home Builders Association said the difference between a typical 3/4‑inch meter and a 1‑inch meter in some cities can amount to about $5,000 in SDCs, and that removing the SDC delta could reduce costs for infill housing.

Witnesses and committee members asked how cities would determine when a larger meter is needed for other reasons (for example, additional fixtures or a private water feature). Cox and others said some jurisdictions already track usage or have programs to verify whether the larger meter is necessary for reasons other than sprinklers; the amendment would leave local methodology and the ability to charge for the meter itself intact.

No vote or formal action was taken at the hearing; the committee heard testimony and closed the public hearing on HB 3505 before moving to the next item.

Ending: The discussion framed the dash‑2 amendment as a targeted policy change aimed at lowering a specific cost barrier to residential sprinklers while preserving local authority to charge for larger meters when justified. The committee did not take a vote at the hearing and accepted testimony from fire officials, building officials, and industry groups.