Page 51 - Green Builder November Issue Codes Update
P. 51

www.greenbuildermedia.com/code-arena

“The ICC has expended significant resources to increase member engagement
  in the code development process. Once the technology is improved and the
governmental voting member representatives start using it, the development
  process will be as robust as ever. Until then, expect some growing pains.”

EXTENDING THE DEBATE                                                     at the hearing/two-step process, as applicable.” However, this was a
                                                                         one-time decision on a handful of votes. This approach is also not
The other unintended consequence of online voting is that it opens       100 percent germane to the Group B cycle, since the in-person totals
a second lobbying period. The first lobbying period occurs during        will not be reflected online.)
the weeks leading up to the public comment hearing. Special interest
groups, from NAHB to regional energy efficiency organizations,             Finally, videos of all testimony are viewable through cdpACCESS.
produce and distribute voting guides. They encourage code officials      Bowman said he “would be surprised if we didn’t know the number” of
to vote a certain way, and usually include rationales or reason          views a video receives. Conceivably, the ICC could compare the number
statements. During the second lobbying period, these same groups         of views with the number of votes, to get a sense of whether online
will be reacting to the online voting agenda, making the final push      voters are taking testimony into consideration. However, Bowman
for votes in their favor.                                                confirmed they are not able to correlate views to a specific voter.

  And that’s where things get complicated. According to Section            The ICC has expended significant resources to increase member
8.1 of Council Policy 28, the following scenario is entirely plausible:  engagement in the code development process. Once the technology
                                                                         is improved and the governmental voting member representatives
  1.  The code development committee votes to approve a code             start using it, the development process will be as robust as ever. Until
change proposal as submitted.                                            then, expect some growing pains.

  2.  Voters in attendance at the public comment hearing reverse         FEEDBACK SOLICITED
the committee action and overwhelmingly vote to disapprove the           ICC recently put out a “Call for Feedback” on the code development
proposal.                                                                process. They are accepting additional rounds of feedback concluding
                                                                         on November 30, 2016 and February 15, 2017.
  3.  The online voters obtain a simple majority and reverse the
public comment hearing result, making the final action … approval          Visit http://bit.ly/2cUzDei. GB
of the proposal as submitted.
                                                                         Mike Collignon is the executive director of the Green Builder Coalition.
WORRISOME OUTCOMES?
                                                                           COURTESY OF
Believe it or not, it could get worse.
  Council Policy 28 does not declare a minimum number of votes for        The Green Builder Coalition

a proposal’s passage or disapproval. Because each proposal will start       The Green Builder Coalition is a not-for-profit association
with a zero-zero vote total, if a proposal is deemed inconsequential,       dedicated to amplifying the voice of green builders
it’s possible that fewer than 60 people could be deciding the fate of       and professionals, driving advocacy and education for
a proposal. (If you find that improbable, it happened on numerous           more sustainable homebuilding practices.
occasions in Group B online voting.) Given the size of the voting           For more information, visit GreenBuilderCoalition.org
membership, that is an alarming possibility.
                                                                            For more information, contact Executive Director Mike Collignon at
  (Note: On page 11 of the Group A results, it states: “In accordance       mcollignon@greenbuildercoalition.org.
with published procedures, this will require a minimum of 30 Online
Governmental Consensus Vote (OGCV) votes cast for each code
change proposal in order for the OGCV to be considered a successful
voting measure. If the vote total is less than 30 for an individual
proposal, the Final Action for that proposal will be the action taken

www.greenbuildermedia.com	                                               November/December 2016  GREEN BUILDER 49
   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56