Sorry it took me awhile to get back to you. Surgery on the right knee last Monday. Just now starting to feel a bit human. I would strongly disagree with the idea that the I-Codes are not a consensus code or standard. Quite the opposite. Without question ICC has the most open, transparent, and welcoming code development process hands down. Anybody can participate at no cost. Others cannot make a claim such as this. As far as the number of people voting I don’t think I’ll ever be truly satisfied with the numbers. CDP Access is the absolute first of its kind among SDO’S. We were the first to employ a technology specifically designed to be more inclusive and make access possible from pretty much anywhere in the world. That is anywhere where there is internet. Even with that I certainly wish the numbers were higher. If you look at CP-28 you will see the board established minimum numbers for any given vote. We are well aware of the very low numbers of the past in the late night hours of code hearings that last way to long. One only has to look at the energy code hearings. (Or not) What’s the old saying? You can lead a horse to water? So what is the answer??? I believe in part it is the next generation and beyond. I don’t think these young people today are as interested in sitting in a convention center (barn) for two weeks as much as they might desire to do it all online. We need to be investing heavily in the next generation and engaging them. CDP Access is also growing with states either already using it for their statewide code adoptions or considering it for that use. Most recently the state of Washington is looking to use it for their code adoptions. The thought is that it makes it easier and more accessible for their citizens to participate in the process just like at the national level. So perhaps this will help as well. Anyway, there is my 2 cents and I hope I addressed your questions.
