BATC’s petition to invalidate the sprinkler mandate was heard at the MN Court of Appeals.
Here’s what you need to know:
- Building upon the strong record built through the administrative code process, legislative debates, and briefs supporting our position, BATC Attorneys Rob Stefanowicz and Brian Huntington represented BATC before the court, with Stefanowicz leading the oral arguments.
- BATC’s argument was multi-pronged, focusing first on the sprinkler mandate being out of line with code norms across the country. Also highlighted, was the lack of an adequate record of data established by the Department of Labor and Industry (DLI) to support the 4500 square-foot threshold and the costs of the mandate itself.
- The three-judge panel asked several questions regarding the sprinkler mandate, lack of adoption by other states, and the code development process, while spending the most time attempting to find the basis to support the DLI’s decision to establish a 4500 square-foot threshold.
- The judges will now review all materials submitted in this case and will render a decision in roughly 90 days, likely sometime in October.
We’ll keep you posted as soon as we hear the judges’ decision. Stay tuned for updates from our blog by signing up for our weekly recap here.
