FLORIDA BUILDING COMMISSION—2007 EFFECTIVENESS ASSESSMENT

SURVEY RESULTS

PRESENTED DECEMBER 12, 2007

 

Commission Respondents to Survey:  Richard Browdy, Nick D'Andrea, Herminio Gonzalez,

James Goodloe, Jon Hamrick, Do Kim, Craig Parrino, Chris Schulte, and Randall Vann.

 

Commissioners were requested to indicate the number that best describes how the Commission  functions on each of the following issues:       Scale Range 10 - 1 (10 highest rating to 1 lowest rating).

 

Decision Making Process                                                       (Average: 9.2)

Commission uses process                                            Commission uses process                              

to effectively build a                                                    to make a majority decision

broad-based consensus.                                               without a consensus of members.                               

10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

 3

5

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

 

Comments:

·        Excellent leadership between Chairman Rodriguez and Jeff Blair.

·       Broad-based consensus works & the facilitator does a commendable job of directing the process.                           

 

Participation and Communication                                         (Average: 8.9)

Communications are respectful,                                  Some members dominate.

balanced and points are clearly                                    Limited listening and  

understood.                                                                 understanding.                                    

 

10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

4

2

1

2

0

0

0

0

0

0

 

Comments:

·        The Chairman and Facilitator have always allowed commissioners and participants an adequate opportunity to communicate their points.

·        Extremely professional and respectful...........never a terse personal attack.

·        Certain commissioners seem to be "legends in their own minds" and speak to let everyone be awed by their great knowledge. It is palatable, as long as what they finally say is salient to the issue at hand.

·        This area has improved over the last year or two...I believe everyone feels comfortable expressing their opinion.

           

 

Commission Relationship to Agency (DCA)                          (Average: 7.9)

 

Commission has developed effective                          Commission has not developed effective

working relationship and communication                    working relationship and

with Agency.                                                               communication with Agency. 

 

10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

3

1

1

3

0

0

0

1

0

0

 

Comments:

·        Rick and Mo are outstanding and the ladies talents are fabulous.

·        The Commission has an excellent working relationship with the DCA staff that has been assigned to the Commission, however, the Agency (DCA) does not always support the Commission's policies or direction.

·        The overall agency does not seem to have a good knowledge of the commission's work, thus placing what the commission does on a lower scale than it should be.

·        The Commission appears to have a good working relationship with the Department. Most interaction is between the Commission and DCA staff.

 

           

Commission Relationship to Staff                                          (Average: 8.7)

Commission has developed effective                          Commission has not developed effective

working relationship and communication                    working relationship and

with staff.                                                                    communication with staff.      

 

10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

4

3

0

1

0

0

1

0

0

0

 

Comments:

·        Very little task direction is needed, and once started, very little adjustment is needed. The agency does great work, in spite of the workload and lack of staff!

·        Very good job done by all.

·        Overall, the relationship is good. Sometimes staff takes liberties as it pertains to "direction" on issues that I feel would be better served posed to the Commission. There is almost a feeling of information being "withheld", or delayed, in an attempt to minimize the discussion or alternative solutions associated with a situation.  

 

 

Time for Consideration                                                                    (Average: 7.7)

Adequate time for presentation,                                  Snap decisions are made or

generating options, analysis and                                  decisions are deferred because

decision making.                                                          of lack of time.                       

                                                           

10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

2

0

2

3

2

0

0

0

0

0

 

Comments:

·        I would like to see more review time on special reports before the commission is ask to make decisions on the report's content

·        The Commission has been challenged by legislative mandates which have abbreviated the Commission's processes and compromised the Commission's work product.

·        The lack of time is directly proportional to the amount of business that comes before the commission. In an attempt to "be all things to all people all of the time", there is not a good "time to workload " ratio for either the staff or commission.

·        I don't know how we could do more to be more fair to all parties.

·        When information is presented timely it is usually very thorough and informative. As described in the previous response, some decisions feel like "snap decisions" when information is distributed late or not in completed form.     

 

 

Information and Analysis                                                       (Average: 8.1)

Critical background and assessment                            Too little or too much, or hard to

of options yield politically                                           use information on the situation,

and practically feasible                                                options & impacts yield hard to

decisions.                                                                     implement decisions.  

                                               

10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

2

2

3

0

1

1

0

0

0

0

 

Comments:

·        The "hard to implement decisions" are not so much related to what the commission or staff do, but rather what has been legislatively decided, with the subsequent directions being imposed on them.

·        Never let it be said any person or group was denied their say.

·        Generally, the information provided is adequate for making a rational, educated decision. The only drawback is the timing of "when" the information is provided.

           

 

 

 

 

Process/Meeting Facilitation                                                 (Average: 9.7)

Facilitation provides a                                                 Facilitation obstructs the efficiency of

positive impact on meeting                                         meeting efficiency, and negatively impacts

efficiency, and consensus-building                              consensus-building for the Commission

for the Commission and its committees.                     and its committees.    

                                               

10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

7

1

1

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

 

Comments:

·        Proper facilitation is of paramount importance to proper functioning of the TAC, Workshop, and Commission meetings, as staff, commission, and public many time get immersed in the issue, and forget about proper protocol and time functions.

·        Thank you Mr. Chairman and Mr. Blair.

·        Facilitator performs an extraordinary role assuring all opinions are heard while building consensus among the Commissioners.    

 

 

What Are The Key Tasks And/Or Unresolved Substantive Issues That Need To Be Addressed By The Commission During 2007 And 2008?

 

General

·        I believe that the commission's work plan for the rest of 2007 and into 2008 are on point, and on course to address the issues at hand, which have been properly prioritized for maximum staff utilization and Commission decisions.

·        None.......I think we are on or ahead of all tasks as charged........I think this voluntary Commission does an excellent job for our citizens.

·        I do not believe there are any extraordinary issues facing the Commission at this time. As usual, there will always be issues that need to be dealt with when they arise. The Legislature can usually be counted on to throw the Commission curve balls such as the Hurricane Mitigation issue.

 

Building Code Adoption Process

·        To update, create and maintain an enforceable technically sufficient code that is not compromised by political or special interests.

 

Building Code Issues

·        I believe 2008 will be a year of additional refinements to the Code. The new 2007 FBC will also become effective late in 2008. Also, with the implementation of any new code, there will be glitch items that will need to be remedied.

 

Hurricane Protections

·        As final analysis is gathered from research of the storms of the previous years, the Code may need fine

tuning in order meet the needs of that research.

 

Education, Communication, Interpretations

·        Once again, education regarding the new Code requirements is paramount.

What Would You Like The Commission To Have Accomplished Within The Next

Five (5) To Ten (10) Years?

 

Process Issues

·        The Commission's "consensus building" process is a forum to be utilized by all construction interests.

·        Stakeholders and issues must be evaluated on both technical and cost-benefit merits.

·        Continue to tweak the process.....continue to train the BOAF and its members as well as the contractors served......continue to streamline the process.

 

Building Code Process

·        The Commission must also become more actively involved with the ICC since it is used as our model code. Florida is a leader when it comes to wind related code requirements & this wealth of knowledge must be shared with the ICC group for incorporation into their base code language. The incorporation of wind related code language would greatly reduce the Commission's need to add "Florida specific" language when performing code updates every three years.

·        Improved lobbying efforts with the legislature to affect greater Commission rule-making authority; development of a "Legislative TAC" to assist the rule makers with technical issues so the result is better promulgated with laws and rules that are enforceable and have a funding mechanism to prevent unfunded mandates. (Aren't you glad you asked!).

 

Building Code Issues

·        Green building standards for all occupancies, not just residential Ability to provide affordable housing in permanent structures that are building code compliant.

·        While refinements to the Code are always expected based on the real possibility of future designed wind events it appears as though the next 5-10 years may be a time to develop Green Building standards and refine Energy Code issues.

·        The Commission should remain sensitive to the cost of housing and not increase the regulatory burden on the consumer or user without a demonstrated proven need.

 

Educations, Communication, and Collaboration

·        The Commission should distinguish itself as a technical body that adequately represents all of the citizens and interests within the state.

·        As always, Education of the Code should be a priority as it relates to all stakeholders.

·        A clear understanding of the building codes by all stakeholders would certainly be the basis for a productive, educated, forward thinking forum.

 

Consistency in Interpretations and Enforcement

·        Improved coordination with the State Fire Marshal regarding the fire prevention and building codes.

·        Continue coordination efforts between the Florida Building Code and the Florida Fire Prevention Code.