A fire board of appeals is an important element of prudent code management for those jurisdictions who take fire code enforcement seriously. However, there are many jurisdictions that have not yet established that formal role within their organization. As a result those organizations miss out on a beneficial mechanism that not only supports their department but adversely impacts economic / social progress in their community.
The model codes provide recommendations for the establishment of a board of appeals. Townships, municipalities and counties typically also have various appeals procedures that may be more easily modeled which can be used as a template for crafting the make-up and function of the board. As an example, Roberts Rules of Order are typically used for managing the meetings, which generally are held by five to eight members that include a chair, vice chair and recording secretary. It is also a good idea to have an attorney present to provide technical legal guidance and assistance to the board both for the established meeting rules and legal interpretations that may be necessary.
The purpose of the board is to provide an appeal process for appellants who think the fire code is being too restrictive' have financial hardships in complying with the code or disagree with an interpretation made by the fire official. The board should be made up of impartial members of the community that reflect a cross-section of interests. As an example, for a six-member board you may have representatives such as: General Contractor, Insurance, Citizen, Architect, Large Business, and Small Business. In this instance, you can see that the balanced membership provides different perspectives to provide reasonable decisions.
Unfortunately, we have been in conversations with fire officials who don't want the interference of an appeals board because they want full authority in enforcing the code or are afraid of the political ramifications that a board could cause. We want to challenge this view and explain why. First, our country's history is founded on Jeffersonian democracy that provides a foundation for folks to disagree. While the fire code is generally a document, which has resulted from tragedy and mistakes, not every single aspect is appropriate in every situation. Sometimes it becomes easier for an inspector to take a black and white stance on a code issue than taking the time to explore the vast amount of gray. This may be because of time, because of a fear of inconsistency or maybe because of a lack of knowledge. This doesn't mean the inspector's approach is wrong, but it doesn't mean its right either.
The board of appeals provides a business an opportunity to be heard. At the same time, it saves the fire official from loosing face in that a consistent code interpretation can be supported at the inspection level, and the board can be left to shoulder the burden of its relevance to the case in point. If the board overturns the fire official, thereby supporting an appealing business, no harm, no foul. It is a benefit for all concerned. The business was able to obtain relief from a requirement that seemed unreasonable for whatever reason. The fire official was able to "hold the line" with regard to what the code said or the interpretation that was given. The decision of the board on a case-by-case issue does not impact any others. However, it does provide a good opportunity for feedback from the community to the fire official as to what the social view of a particular "acceptable risk" may be. Professionally this is very important.
If we as fire officials consistently have board of appeals issues overturned which are nothing more but straightforward code interpretations then two things may be happening.
- The code requirement is too restrictive, or
- We are doing a poor job of educating the public as to why this issue is a significant risk.
