Meeting II—October 15, 2008—Tampa, Florida

Embassy Suites Hotel; 3705 Spectrum Boulevard, 33612; 1.813.977.7066


Meeting Objectives

ü      To Approve Regular Procedural Topics (Agenda and Report)

ü      To Review Workgroup’s Scope and Charge

ü      To Hear a Report Regarding TRAP Feedback

ü      To Review Options Regarding a Universal Bedroom Definition

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

 1:00          Welcome and Opening

 1:05          Review of Universal Bedroom Definition Workgroup Scope

 1:10          Agenda Review and Approval

 1:15          Review and Approval of the May 7, 2008 Facilitator’s Summary Report

 1:20          Report on Technical Review and Advisory Panel (TRAP) Input on Issue

 1:40          Discussion, Identification and Evaluation in Turn of Options Regarding

                  a Universal Bedroom Definition

 3:20          General Public Comment

 3:40          Review of Workgroup Delivery and Meeting Schedule

 3:50          Next Steps

 4:00          Adjourn               


Contact Information and Project Webpage

Jeff Blair; 850.644.6320; jblair@fsu.edu ; http://consensus.fsu.edu/FBC/ubdw.html

Universal Bedroom Definition Workgroup Members


Commission Appointments

Dick Browdy, Matt Carlton, Joe Crum, Dale Greiner, Jim Goodloe, Jim Schock, and

Randy Vann.


Health Department Appointments

Ed Barranco, Anthony Gaudio, Roxanne Groover, Robert Harper, Mark Lander, Jim Love, Jim Schivinski, and Ed Williams.



Chairman Rodriguez announced that the Commission is convening a facilitated joint workgroup process with the Florida Department of Health (DOH) to develop recommendations regarding requirements for the sizing of septic systems. The purpose of the Workgroup is to develop recommendations regarding an acceptable definition of “Bedrooms” used for the sizing of septic systems. The definition should work from the Florida Building Code (FBC) and Department of Health (DOH) perspectives.



Options Identified by Members for Evaluation


Option 1:

Bedroom: Minimum 70 sq ft, closet, means of escape and rescue to the outside, door, and must be conditioned space (code requires heating for conditioned space).

3 members voted in support of this option in concept.


Option 2:

Bedroom: Minimum 70 sq ft, closet, means of escape and rescue to the outside, door,

must be conditioned space, and the room is not a: hallway, bathroom, kitchen, living room, family room, dining room, breakfast nook, pantry, laundry room, sunroom, recreation room, media/video room, or exercise room (Note: the concept is to create a list of exceptions and all other rooms would be classified as bedroom).

10 members voted in support of this option in concept.


Option 3:

Use the Building Code requirements of a specific occupant load for housing: 1 person per 200 sq ft, and at the plan review process require 75 gallons/person/day for sizing the system. The concept is for an occupant load calculation based on square footage.

3 members voted in support of this option in concept.




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      Represent and communicate with member’s constituent group(s).



ü      Design and facilitate a participatory task force process.

ü      Assist participants to stay focused and on task.

ü      Assure that participants follow ground rules.

ü      Prepare agenda packets and provide meeting summary reports.



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.



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.


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:




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




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.


The Florida Building Commission, the Department of Health, and the Universal Bedroom Definition Workgroup encourage written comments—All written comments will be included in the meeting summary report.




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 Workgroup, and refrain from any personal attacks or derogatory language.


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.



Please give completed form(s) to the Facilitator for inclusion in the meeting summary report.