Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Fire Code 2025 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Fire Commission postpones final action on 2025 fire code after public debate over retrofit sprinklers
Summary
The San Francisco Fire Commission postponed consideration of amendments to the 2025 Fire Code to January 2026 after City Attorney staff said the ordinance has not been introduced to the Board of Supervisors; public commenters urged both maintaining retrofit deadlines to protect life safety and caution about costs and process transparency.
The San Francisco Fire Commission on Dec. 10 postponed final action on proposed amendments to the city’s 2025 Fire Code, saying the ordinance has not yet been introduced to the Board of Supervisors and that commissioners should review a finalized version in January.
The delay came after Deputy City Attorney Sarah Fabian told commissioners that the draft fire‑code ordinance remains under development and that, once introduced to supervisors, the ordinance will be subject to the board’s posting and committee process (including a 30‑day posting period) before votes. "I would recommend that the discussion and possible approval take place at the January meeting," Fabian said.
Why it matters: the 2025 code includes retrofit requirements affecting existing residential high‑rise buildings. Public commenters and trade groups urged opposing positions: labor and sprinkler‑industry representatives urged the commission to preserve the current retrofit schedule on life‑safety grounds, while contractors and renewable‑energy professionals pressed for clearer notice, accurate cost data and stakeholder input before any changes are approved.
During a public‑comment period taken on the item, Rudy Gonzales of the San Francisco Building and Construction Trades Council asked commissioners to "preserve the fire code as it stands" and to involve industry experts and tenant representatives in any amendment discussions. "We want to prioritize life safety first," he said. Randy Robson of the Sprinkler Fitters Association of California warned that "high‑rise buildings without fire sprinklers are disasters waiting to happen," arguing that extending compliance dates increases risk to occupants and first responders.
Chase Browning of the National Fire Sprinkler Association cited the group’s analysis of retrofit costs and disputed high per‑unit cost figures reported in recent local media. Browning said documented retrofit cost estimates are nearer to "$12,000 or $13,000 per unit," adding that installation methods exist that avoid extensive wall demolition and displacement. Janice Chung, a former San Francisco fire protection engineer who now serves as fire marshal in Redwood City and San Carlos, recommended commissioners consult city attorneys about potential liability if state codes take effect Jan. 1 and a local ordinance is not adopted.
Commissioners also heard procedural concerns from contractors who said the packet for a November meeting was posted on short notice. Contractor Eric Schoonberg told the commission the code packet was made available "less than 48 hours" before the Nov. 12 meeting and urged adherence to public‑notice expectations so stakeholders can meaningfully review proposed amendments.
What happened next: With the City Attorney’s recommendation and the pending introduction of an ordinance to the Board of Supervisors, the commission agreed to postpone any approval and to take public comment now with a commitment to review the updated draft at the January 2026 meeting.
What’s next: The commission expects the mayor’s office to introduce the final ordinance to the Board of Supervisors; the Board’s process (posting, committee review, first and second readings) will determine the schedule for final adoption and any legal deadlines. The commission will take the item up again in January with updated materials and additional public comment.
