Page 65 - Green Builder May-June 2020 Issue

www.greenbuildermedia.com/code-arena
www.greenbuildermedia.com/code-arena

Add the ICC’s structural hurdles against efficiency to the mix—the members that are disengaged. Voting members largely vote in lock-
four anti-efficiency votes on the Residential Energy Committee and step to their favorite political lobbyist rather than considering both
the super majority needed to overturn bad recommendations result- the proposal and the work/time that went into creating and shep-
ing from those four votes—and it becomes easy to understand why herding proposals through the process.
maximizing a jurisdiction’s voting clout and casting their maximum
eligible votes became a high priority—not just for local and state We saw more voters than ever
jurisdictions, but for the national, regional and state governmental before participate in the develop-
associations that represent them. ment of the 2021 IECC—and they
overwhelmingly voted in favor of
I really haven’t taken a strong posi- increased energy efficiency. This
tion on the cdpACCESS and elec- expanded participation was made
tronic voting process. I’ve heard possible by online voting. With
all of the issues, but have gener- tight municipal budgets, most local
ally found the process straight governments can’t afford to send
forward. It has been easy and con- LAUREN URBANEK all of their eligible voting mem-
venient to submit proposed code Senior Energy Policy Advocate bers out of office for upwards of
changes, invite collaborators and Natural Resources Defense Council two weeks to participate in the in-
manage the submittal process. person public comment hearings and voting. But those voices are
ANTHONY FLOYD, FAIA, However, I’m still adjusting to the still critically important! Local governments recognize how crucial
CSP online governmental consensus a robust energy code is to meet their climate goals, and they want a
Green Building Program Manager/ vote (OGCV). say. The online voting process ensures equitable access and input.
Energy Code Specialist, During the last code cycle, I had And the results speak for themselves: When more voices are heard,
City of Scottsdale, AZ a code proposal with sound testi- more good things can happen.
mony and support that received more than two-thirds majority votes
at the public comment hearings, but failed as a result of the OGCV. I S. CRAIG DRUMHELLER The electronic voting process
couldn’t understand where the opposition came from. The downside AVP, Construction Codes & Standards implemented with ICC’s cdpAC-
of the OGCV is that you don’t hear the rational for the swing of votes. National Association of Home Builders CESS is generally helpful in
At least in the public comment hearings, one can hear the pros and developing practical building
cons that lead up to the deciding vote. The upside of the OGCV is codes. NAHB has been supportive of the online voting process since
that you get more participation in the voting process, but with the its inception. However, the support was based on the assumption that
possibility of less informed voters. code officials made up the majority of the voters. We support code offi-
cials participating as neutral arbiters in the process, as they don’t have
I began taking part in code devel- a dog in the fight—they know what is reasonable, and they know what
opment during the 2015 cycle. At is enforceable. But when the ballot box is stuffed with voters who are
times, 20-50 people were deciding not familiar with the building code, individual proposals or its conse-
on code change proposals. The quences, it can greatly undermine the process and usability of the code.
online vote increased participation, The major problem is that there is no assurance that the partici-
but does it increase participation pants in the online Governmental Consensus Vote are informed, or
by the right people, at the right provide a balanced representation of governmental members. GB
stage, and to what consequence?
For me, the right people are Reference items:
ROBBY SCHWARZ those who work in the code ■ Validation Committee
Principal Thinker, BUILDTank everyday interpreting, review- ■ Next Steps in the Code Development Process
ing, enforcing, designing, building, and complying with the code. ■ Final Action
Therefore, the definition of a governmental voting member needs
to be more clearly defined, and a definition for a non-governmental Mike Collignon is the executive director and co-founder of the
voting member needs to be created. Green Builder Coalition.
®
The impactful online voting occurs at the end of the public com-
ment hearing, which can overturn proposals that failed or passed at COURTESY OF

both the committee action and the public comment hearings. Voting The Green Builder®Coalition
at the end of the process without active engagement throughout
the development process significantly undermines the hearings. In The Green Builder®Coalition is a not-for-profit association dedicated
essence, what is the point of the hearings? to amplifying the voice of green builders and professionals, driving
The unforeseen consequence of the current structure is that it advocacy and education for more sustainable homebuilding
has become political, with lobbyists creating voter guides for voting practices. For more information, visit GreenBuilderCoalition.org

www.greenbuildermedia.com May/June 2020 GREEN BUILDER 59

5/22/20 10:28 AM
57-59 GB 0520 Code Arena.indd 59 5/22/20 10:28 AM
57-59 GB 0520 Code Arena.indd 59