FLORIDA BUILDING COMMISSION
2010 FLORIDA ACCESSIBILITY CODE WORKGROUP
February
2, 2009
Crown Plaza Melbourne; 2605 North A1A Highway, Melbourne Florida; 800.980.6429
Meeting Objectives
ü
To Approve
Regular Procedural Topics (Agenda)
ü
To Review
Workgroup Procedures, Guidelines, and Decision-Making Requirements
ü
To Hear an
Overview of the Workgroup’s Scope, Charge, and Task Development Strategy
ü
To Discuss
Project Tasks and Identify Information Development Needs
ü
To Consider
Public Comment
ü
To Identify
Needed Next Steps and Agenda Items for Next Meeting
All
Agenda Times—Including Public Comment and Adjournment—Are Subject to Change
Meeting Agenda
1:00 Welcome
and Opening
Agenda Review and Approval
Review
of Commission’s Workgroup Meeting Guidelines, Consensus-Building and
Decision-Making Process, and
Sunshine Requirements
Review of Workgroup’s Scope
and Charge
Review
of Workgroup’s Task Development Strategy
Discussion of Project Tasks and
Identification of Information Development Needs
General
Public Comment
Review of
Workgroup Delivery and Meeting Schedule
Next Steps
Adjourn
Contact Information and Project Webpage
Jeff Blair: jblair@fsu.edu ; http://consensus.fsu.edu/FBC/accessibility-code.html
2010 Florida Accessibility
Code Workgroup
Pam Darworth, Michael
Elliot, Bemmie Eustace, Kiko Franco, Skip Gregory, Jeff Gross,
Jon Hamrick, Jack
Humburg, Julia Kates, Neal Melick, Sharon Mignardi, Bill Norkunas, Barbara
Page,
Ben Ritter, Larry
Schneider, Jim Schock, Randy Vann, Bob Vincent, Steve Watson,
Soy Williams, and Phillip
Wisely.
OVERVIEW AND PROJECT SCOPE
The scope of the Workgroup is to develop
recommendations for amending the Florida Accessibility Code for Building
Construction once the US Department of Justice completes its adoption of the
next generation of the ADA Accessibility Standards. The task is to
integrate the relevant Florida standards in ss. 553.501-553.513, F.S., into the
2004 ADAAG as adopted by 28 CFR 36 (prospective). Although DOJ's process is not
complete, the Workgroup will begin with the 2004 ADAAG and modify the new draft
FACBC to reflect DOJ's amendments when those are available.
The process for developing the new Accessibility
Code will be divided into major tasks as follows:
Task 1:
Integration of Florida standards located in the
current Florida Accessibility Code into sections of the 2004 ADAAG that have a
one for one parallel section.
Task 2:
Deciding what to do with Florida standards that
are in sections/subsections of ADAAG I that do not have a one for one parallel
section in the 2004 ADAAG.
Task 3:
Integration of Florida standards into new
sections in the 2004 ADAAG that have no parallel in the Florida Accessibility
Code (e.g., recreational facilities).
Task 4:
Revising the draft Florida Accessibility Code
based on the 2004 ADAAG for changes made by DOJ in its rule making.
FLORIDA
ACCESSIBILITY CODE WORKGROUP PROCEDURAL GUIDELINES
PARTICIPANTS’ ROLE
ü
The Workgroup
process is an opportunity to explore possibilities. Offering or exploring an
idea does not necessarily imply support for it.
ü
Listen to
understand. Seek a shared understanding even if you don’t agree.
ü
Be focused
and concise—balance participation & minimize repetition. Share the airtime.
ü
Look to the
facilitator(s) to be recognized. Please raise your hand to speak.
ü
Speak one
person at a time. Please don’t interrupt each other.
ü
Focus on
issues, not personalities. Avoid stereotyping or personal attacks.
ü
To the extent
possible, offer options to address other’s concerns, as well as your own.
ü
Participate
fully in discussions, and complete meeting assignments as requested.
ü
Serve as an
accessible liaison, and represent and communicate with member’s constituent
group(s).
FACILITATORS’ ROLE (FCRC Consensus Center @ FSU)
ü
Design and
facilitate a participatory workgroup process.
ü
Assist the
Workgroup to build consensus on a package of recommendations for delivery to
the Florida Building Commission.
ü
Provide
process design and procedural recommendations to staff and the Workgroup.
ü
Assist
participants to stay focused and on task.
ü
Assure that
participants follow ground rules.
ü
Prepare and
post agenda packets, worksheets and meeting summary reports.
GUIDELINES FOR BRAINSTORMING
ü
Speak when
recognized by the Facilitator(s).
ü
Offer one idea
per person without explanation.
ü
No comments,
criticism, or discussion of other's ideas.
ü
Listen
respectively to other's ideas and opinions.
ü
Seek
understanding and not agreement at this point in the discussion.
THE NAME STACKING PROCESS
ü
Determines
the speaking order.
ü
Participant
raises hand to speak. Facilitator(s) will call on participants in turn.
ü
Facilitator(s)
may interrupt the stack (change the speaking order) in order to promote
discussion on a specific issue or, to balance participation and allow those who
have not spoken on an issue an opportunity to do so before others on the list
who have already spoken on the issue.
ACCEPTABILITY RANKING SCALE
During the meetings,
members will be asked to develop and rank options, and following
discussions and refinements,
may be asked to do additional rankings of the options if requested by members
and staff. Please be prepared to offer specific refinements or changes to
address your reservations. The following scale will be utilized for the ranking
exercises:
WORKGROUP’S CONSENSUS PROCESS
CONSENSUS
The Florida
Building Commission seeks to develop
consensus decisions on its recommendations and policy decisions. The
Commission provides a forum for stakeholders representing different interests
to participate in a consensus-building process where issues affecting the
construction industry are discussed and evaluated on their technical merits and
cost-benefits to the citizens of the State of Florida. In order to achieve the best possible decisions,
the Commission relies on its workgroups, ad hoc committees, technical advisory
committees, and program oversight committees to develop consensus
recommendations on project specific issues.
Definitions
Consensus is a process, an attitude and an outcome. Consensus processes have the potential of
producing better quality, more informed and better-supported outcomes.
As
a process, consensus is a problem
solving approach in which all members:
o
Jointly
share, clarify and distinguish their concerns;
o
Jointly
develop alternatives to address concerns; and then
o
Seek to adopt
recommendations everyone can embrace or at least live with.
In
a consensus process, members should be able to honestly say:
o I believe that other members understand my point
of view;
o I believe I understand other members’ points of
view; and
o Whether or not I prefer this decision, I support
it because it was arrived at openly and fairly and because it is the best
solution we can achieve at this time.
Consensus
as an attitude means that each
member commits to work toward agreements that meet their own and other member
needs and interests so that all can support the outcome.
Consensus
as an outcome means that agreement
on decisions is reached by all members or by a significant majority of members
after a process of active problem solving.
In a consensus outcome, the level of enthusiasm for the agreement may
not be the same among all members on any issue, but on balance all should be
able to live with the overall package.
Levels of consensus on a committee outcome can
include a mix of:
o Participants who strongly support the solution;
o Participants who can “live with” the solution; and
o Some participants who do not support the solution
but agree not to veto it.
WORKGROUP’S CONSENSUS PROCESS
The Workgroup will seek
to develop a package of consensus-based recommendations for submittal to the
Florida Building Commission. General
consensus is a participatory process whereby, on matters of substance, the
members strive for agreements which all of the members can accept, support,
live with or agree not to oppose. In instances where, after vigorously
exploring possible ways to enhance the members’ support for the final decision
on a recommendation, and the Workgroup finds that 100% acceptance or support is
not achievable, final decisions will require at least 75% favorable vote of all
members present and voting. This
super majority decision rule underscores the importance of actively developing
consensus throughout the process on substantive issues with the participation
of all members and which all can live with.
In instances where the Workgroup finds that even 75% acceptance or
support is not achievable, publication of recommendations will include
documentation of the differences and the options that were considered for which
there is more than 50% support from the Workgroup.
The Workgroup will
develop its recommendations using consensus-building techniques with the
assistance of the facilitator.
Techniques such as brainstorming, ranking and prioritizing approaches
will be utilized. Where differences
exist that prevent the Workgroup from reaching a final consensus decision (i.e.
with support of at least 75% of the members) on a recommendation, the Workgroup
will outline the differences in its documentation.
The Workgroup’s consensus
process will be conducted as an open process consistent with applicable
law. Workgroup members, staff, and
facilitator will be the only participants seated at the table. Only Workgroup
members may participate in discussions and vote on proposals and
recommendations. The facilitator, or a Workgroup member through the
facilitator, may request specific clarification from a member of the public in
order to assist the Workgroup in understanding an issue. Observers/members of the public are welcome to speak during the
public comment period provided at each meeting, and all comments submitted on
the public comment forms provided in the agenda packets will be included in the
facilitator’ summary reports.
Facilitator will work
with staff and Workgroup members to design agendas and worksheets that will be
both efficient and effective. The staff
will help the Workgroup with information and meeting logistics.
To enhance the
possibility of constructive discussions as members educate themselves on the
issues and engage in consensus-building, members agree to refrain from public
statements that may prejudge the outcome of the Workgroup’s consensus
process. In discussing the Workgroup
process with the media, members agree to be careful to present only their own
views and not the views or statements of other participants. In addition, in
order to provide balance to the Workgroup process, members agree to represent
and consult with their stakeholder interest groups.
SUNSHINE LAW GUIDELINES
(Section 286.011, Florida Statutes)
Applicability of Sunshine Law
1. Meetings
of public groups (workgroups) or commissions must be open to the public;
2. Reasonable notice of such meetings must be given; and
3. Minutes of the meetings must be taken.
Ø
Equally
applicable to elected and appointed members and applies to any gathering of two
or more members of the same group (Workgroup) to discuss some matter which will
foreseeably come before that group (Workgroup) for action. Applies to advisory
groups.
Ø
Written correspondence
(reports) circulated among group members for comments.
Ø
Telephone
conversations and computer communications including e-mails and attachments.
Ø
Delegation of
authority to a single individual.
Ø
Use of
nonmembers as liaisons between group (Workgroup) members.
Issues
not Subject to Sunshine Law Requirements
Ø
Use of a written report by one member to inform
other members of a subject which will be discussed at a public meeting, if
prior to the meeting, there is no interaction related to the report among the
members.
Ø
Members
(Workgroup) or designee may be authorized to gather information as a
fact-finder only.
Ø
Members may
meet together socially, provided they refrain from discussing matters on which
foreseeable action before the (Workgroup) are discussed.
Workgroup members are subject to the requirements of Florida's
Government in the Sunshine Law, commonly referred to as the Sunshine Law
(Section 286.011 F.S.).
There are four basic requirements of section 286.011, Florida
Statutes:
(1) Meetings of public
boards or commissions (workgroups) must be open to the public;
(2) Reasonable notice of
such meetings must be given;
(3) Any
voting of members must be done in public (including discussions between two or
more members regarding a matter on which the Workgroup might foreseeably take action);
and
(4) Minutes of the
meetings must be taken.