FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
BUILDING
ENERGY RATING SYSTEM (BERS) STEERING COMMITTEE
1714 S.W. 34th Street—Gainesville, Florida 32607—1.352.371.3600
ü
To Approve Regular Procedural Topics (Agenda)
ü
To Review Steering Committee Procedures,
Guidelines, and Decision-Making Requirements
ü
To Hear an Overview of the Steering
Committee’s Scope, Charge, and Task Development Strategy
ü
To Review Relevant Statutes, Rules and
Program Functions
ü
To Review Residential and Commercial Rater
Survey Results
ü
To 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
8:30 Welcome and Opening
Agenda
Review and Approval
Review of Steering Committee’s
Meeting Guidelines, Consensus-Building and
Decision-Making
Process, and Sunshine Requirements
Steering Committee’s Scope and Charge Overview
Building Energy Rating System Overview
Review
of Relevant Statutes, Rules and Program Functions (DCA)
Review
Program Administration (FSEC)
Review
National Energy Rating Programs (FSEC)
Commercial Rater Standard
Rater Survey Results Review
Identification of Information
Development Needs
General
Public Comment
Review
of Steering Committee Delivery and Meeting Schedule
Next
Steps
12:30 Adjourn
Contact
Information and Project Webpage
Jeff Blair: jblair@fsu.edu ; http://consensus.fsu.edu/BERS-Steering-Committee/index.html
MEMBERSHIP,
OVERVIEW AND PROJECT SCOPE
Representation
and Members
Engineers:
Paki Taylor, Keith Ponitz, and Vince Briones
Architects:
Larry Maxwell and Karol Kazmierczak
Public
Utilities: Bill Eberle and David Reed
Contractors:
Wendy Powell (insulation), Larry
Banks
(a/c), and Mike Nau (windows), Nathan Cross (building)
Raters:
Dennis Stroer, John Kiefer, Arlene Stewart, and Ryan McCracken
DCA
Staff: Mo Madani, Ann Stanton, and Rick Dixon
Facilitator:
Jeff Blair, FCRC at FSU
Program
Administrator: Philip Fairey, Tei Kucharski, M. Swami, and Rob Vieira
Project Objective
Review the
current regulations, rules and business functions of the BERS and determine
whether
improvement/changes
to the program are needed.
Project Schedule:
Appoint
Building Energy Rating System Steering Committee 6-7/
2010
Conduct
a survey to obtain feedback from users on the BERS 6-7/
2010
Send out survey 6
/29/2010
Complete survey 7/22/2010
Steering
Committee 1st meeting (Gainesville) 10/2010
Introduction (DCA)
Program review - Presentations
DCA - Statutes and Rule
FSEC – Program
administration
National program review
Steering
Committee 2nd meeting (TBD) 12/2010
Review feedback from the survey
(DCA)
Identify key topical issues for
evaluation
Rank/prioritize key topical issues
Formulate recommendations for action
Steering
Committee 3rd meeting (if needed) 2/2011
Meeting
Schedule
If possible,
meetings to be held in conjunction with Florida Building Commission meetings:
October 2010,
December 2010, and if needed February 2011.
BERS
STEERING COMMITTEE PROCEDURAL GUIDELINES
PARTICIPANTS’
ROLE
ü
The Steering Committee 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 Steering
Committee process.
ü
Assist the Steering Committee to build
consensus on a package of recommendations for delivery to the Department of
Community Affairs.
ü
Provide process design and procedural
recommendations to staff and the Steering Committee.
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:
STEERING COMMITTEE’S CONSENSUS PROCESS
CONSENSUS
The Florida Department of Community Affairs seeks to
develop consensus decisions on its recommendations and policy decisions. The BERS Steering Committee provides a
forum for stakeholders representing different interests to participate in a
consensus-building process where issues affecting the building energy rating
industry are discussed and evaluated on their technical merits and cost-benefits
to the citizens of the State of Florida.
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.
STEERING COMMITTEE’S CONSENSUS PROCESS
The Steering Committee will seek to develop a
package of consensus-based recommendations for submittal to the Florida Department
of Community Affairs. 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 Steering
Committee 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 Steering Committee 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 Steering Committee.
The Steering Committee 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 Steering
Committee from reaching a final consensus decision (i.e. with support of at
least 75% of the members) on a recommendation, the Steering Committee will
outline the differences in its documentation.
The Steering Committee’s consensus process
will be conducted as an open process consistent with applicable law. Steering Committee members, staff, and
facilitator will be the only participants seated at the table. Only Steering
Committee members may participate in discussions and vote on proposals and
recommendations. The facilitator, or a Steering Committee member through the
facilitator, may request specific clarification from a member of the public in
order to assist the Steering Committee 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 Steering
Committee members to design agendas and worksheets that will be both efficient
and effective. The staff will help the Steering
Committee 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 Steering Committee’s consensus process. In discussing the Steering Committee 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 Steering Committee process, members agree to represent and
consult with their stakeholder interest groups.
SUNSHINE
LAW GUIDELINES
(Section 286.011, Florida Statutes)
1. Meetings of public groups (Steering
Committees) or Department of Community Affairs must be open to the public;
2. Reasonable
notice of such meetings must be given (by publication in FAW at least 7 days in
advance of a meeting); 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 (Steering
Committee) to discuss some matter which will foreseeably come before that group
(Steering Committee) 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 (Steering
Committee) members.
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
(Steering Committee) 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 (Steering Committee) are discussed.
Steering Committee 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 Department of Community Affairs
(Steering Committees) 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 Steering Committee might
foreseeably take action); and
(4) Minutes of the meetings must be taken.
WORKSHEETS
ISSUES IDENTIFICATION
Think about the information presented from the survey
regarding the Building Energy Rating System. What issues need to be addressed
in order to enhance the efficacy of the System.
Please use the following space to jot down your thoughts.
Members may be asked to rank the issues for discussion
order purposes.
Ranking Scale:
5 Highest Level of Priority; Urgent
4 High Priority
3 Moderate Level of Priority
2 Low Level of Priority
1 Lowest Possible Priority; Group
Should not Pursue
OPTIONS IDENTIFICATION EXERCISE
Please use the space below to write down possible options
to address the key issues identified earlier regarding enhancing the efficacy
of the Building Energy Rating System .
Please use the following space to jot down your thoughts.
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:
|
Acceptability Ranking Scale |
4 = acceptable, I
agree |
3 = acceptable, I agree with minor reservations |
2 = not acceptable, I don’t agree unless major
reservations addressed |
1 = not acceptable |
FACILITATION,
MEETING AND PROCESS DESIGN BY
JEFF A.
BLAIR
FCRC
Consensus Center
Florida
Conflict Resolution Consortium
Florida
State University
Morgan
Building, Suite 236
2035
East Paul Dirac Drive
Tallahassee,
Florida 32310
Phone:
(850) 644-6320; Fax: (850) 644-4968
http://consensus.fsu.edu
"The purpose of the Consortium is to
serve as a neutral resource to assist citizens and public and private interests
in Florida to seek cost-effective solutions to public disputes and problems
through the use of alternative dispute resolution and consensus
building." --F.S. Public
Postsecondary Education §1004.59
The Consortium based at Florida State
University in Tallahassee and University of Central Florida in Orlando,
provides dispute resolution and consensus building service, education, training
and research to build a broader understanding of the value of collaborative
approaches and create a cadre of citizens, leaders, professionals and students
skilled in using collaborative consensus building and conflict resolution
processes.
Our
mission is to bring Floridians together to learn to transform unproductive
conflict into cost-effective, sustainable solutions. The Consortium serves as a catalyst to create
supportive policies and to help educate statewide on the appropriate use of
mediation, facilitation and other collaborative problem-solving approaches to
resolve a wide range of public policy issues.
The Consortium offers neutral technical
assistance to a wide range of professionals, agency staff and private citizens
and organizations engaged in public problems throughout Florida. We help to design and implement efforts for
intergovernmental collaboration, community and
public problem-solving, and land-use and environmental dispute
resolution. We also provide referral
services connecting stakeholders and potential users with trained dispute
resolution professionals.
PUBLIC COMMENT FORM
The
Florida Department of Community Affairs and the Building Energy Rating System Steering
Committee encourage written comments—All written comments will be included in
the meeting summary report.
Name:
Organization:
Meeting
Date:
Please make your comment(s) as specific as possible, and offer
suggestions to address your concerns.
Please limit comment(s) to topics within the scope of the Steering
Committee.
Any personal attacks or derogatory language will be discarded.
The facilitator may, at his discretion, limit public comment to a
maximum of three-minutes (3) per person, depending on the number of individuals
wishing to speak.
COMMENT:
Please
give completed form(s) to the Facilitator for inclusion in the meeting summary report.