FLORIDA BUILDING COMMISSION
SOFFIT SYSTEMS WORKGROUP
February
4, 2009—Meeting II
Crown Plaza
Melbourne; 2605 North A1A Highway, Melbourne
Florida; 800.980.6429
Meeting Objectives
ü
To Approve
Regular Procedural Topics (Agenda and Report)
ü
To Identify
Issues and Options Regarding Implementing Labeling Requirements for Soffit
Systems
ü
To Discuss
and Evaluate Level of Acceptability of Proposed Options
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
8:30 Welcome
and Opening
Agenda Review and Approval
November 12, 2008
Facilitator’s Summary Report Approval
Identification
of Additional Issues and Options
Discussion, Identification and
Evaluation in Turn of Options Regarding
Possible
Labeling Requirements for Soffit Systems
General
Public Comment
Workgroup
Delivery and Meeting Schedule Review
Next Steps
1:00 Adjourn
Contact Information
and Project Webpage
Jeff Blair; 850.644.6320;
jblair@fsu.edu ; http://consensus.fsu.edu/FBC/soffit.html
Soffit Systems Workgroup
Members
Joe Belcher,
Bob Boyer, Joe Breese, Jimmy Buckner, Rusty Carroll,
Dave
Johnston/Matthew Dobson (member/alternate), Jamie Gascon, Allen Hoying,
Do Kim, C.W.
Macomber, Lance Olsen, Paul Radauskus, Tim Reinhold, Neil Sexton,
and Jim
Schock.
Overview
Chairman Rodriguez announced that at the request of stakeholders the
Commission is convening a Soffit Systems Workgroup. The Workgroup will work
with affected stakeholder interests in a facilitated workgroup process to evaluate and build
consensus on recommendations regarding labeling requirements for soffit systems
in the Florida Building Code.
The
purpose of the Soffits Systems Workgroup is to
evaluate and build consensus on recommendations regarding labeling and
performance requirements for soffit systems in the Florida Building Code.
Needed
Information Identified at Meeting I
·
Relevant
standards
·
Labeling
requirements for other products
·
Current
Florida Building Code requirements
·
Miami-Dade
County protocols
·
Standard
soffit system installation examples for different product types
·
List the
different types of materials and construction types
·
Overview of
Product Approval System and what submittals are required for approval
·
Matrix or
reporting system summarizing the different soffit system types, materials,
applications, and installation specifications.
Issues Identified for Evaluation at Meeting I
Workgroup members were asked to identify key
topical issues that should be evaluated for developing soffit
systems labeling recommendations for the Florida
Building Code.
Following are the key topical issues identified by
the Workgroup:
·
Format
·
Content
(what should be provided on the label)
·
Inspection Needs (providing on-site what the building inspector needs to ensure the
product complies with the Code)
·
Performance Standards (product/material types and prescriptive
requirements)
·
Installation Instructions
SOFFIT SYSTEMS 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
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 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.