Final Transcript

	STATE OF CA-DEPT OF GENERAL SERVICES:
	The Detectable Warnings Task Force 
	January 23, 2019/1:30 p.m. PST  

SPEAKERS

Susan Moe 
Kristin Vandersluis
Ida Claire

PRESENTATION

Moderator	Ladies and gentlemen, we thank you for standing by and welcome you to the Detectable Warnings Task Force conference call.  At this time, everyone joining by phone has an open line for speaking.  We recommend that you mute your phone when not speaking to help cut down on background sound.  [Operator instructions].  As a reminder, the conference call is being recorded.

	I’ll now turn the meeting over to our host, Susan Moe.  Please, go ahead.  

Susan	Good afternoon, everybody.  Welcome, and I’m so glad you are here and that you have decided to participate in our task force for the detectable warning.  We’re going to go ahead and start with introductions, and what we’d like to hear from you, what are your goals for participation or concerns and what do you worry about as we start to go through this process. 
	
	My name is Susan Moe.  I’m a senior architect here at the Division of State Architect and Access Code and Policy.  So again, we really want to thank you for taking the time to participate, because I know that even a handful of meetings tears a lot into your schedule, because everybody is so busy, so we really thank you.  

	With that, I’m going to go ahead and turn this over to Kristin Vandersluis, and she is going to be our facilitator for today, and for the future sessions that we have planned.  With that, I’ll turn it over to Kristin.

Kristin	Wonderful.  Thank you, Sue.  I hope everybody on the line can hear me.  My name is Kristin Vandersluis, and I am an independent contractor that has been brought in to help facilitate our task force meeting.  I’m really looking forward to a productive five meetings together, and my job today and at future meetings will be to keep us on time and on topic.  

	With that, let’s start with introductions around the room.  We will begin here with those who are in Sacramento, and when they’re finished, we will then move to our remote participants who are on the phone.  So, I just introduced myself.  I will share, as an example, what Sue had mentioned we would like each of you to share, which is what is your hope or goal for this task force when we talk about detectable warnings, and if you have any concerns.  

	As I mentioned, I’m Kristin Vandersluis.  My hope is that we feel at the end of the process that we have a good—I know we’re not going to get an end product first day, but that we feel that everybody had a chance to speak and give their input.  And I’m going to be optimistic and say as your facilitator I don’t have any concerns. 

	We’re going to begin to my left and go around the table.  After that, I will prompt those of you on the phone to then share.  We have a few more people coming in.  Just a moment.  Yes, wonderful.  Hi, there. 

Rachelle 	So on your left—my name is Rachelle Golden.  I am an attorney from Fresno, California.  I have been waiting for this task force for a very long time.  My goal is to engage in a collaborative discussion about ways that we can improve detectable warnings but that also makes it more safe for people who have other disabilities, including my own, which is the use of a wheelchair, as well as for the general population.  

	And so I’m excited to hear what everyone has to say, and hopefully we can make some really super awesome progress in maybe coming up with a better, more user friendly design in some way.  So that’s my goal.

Debbie	Good afternoon, Debbie Wong, Senior Architect and Certified Access Specialist.  

Steve	I’m Steve Twist of Stephen Twist Consulting, Incorporated, and I’m a CASp and a Plans Examiner.  My hope is to maybe find some agreement on placement of truncated domes.  As a plans examiner, I see them.  I fight with contractors all the time because of construction-related—construction doesn’t often coincide with the way the code says to place domes, I oftentimes find them in the middle of access aisles and all kinds of places, so I think that that’s really a confusing thing for the visually impaired, they don’t know whether they’re safe or whether they’re not safe.  It’s a mess, and I hope to be a part of defining that better and making it a better thing.  I guess that’s really my goal and my concerns all kind of in one little package.  

Ida	Ida Claire.  I know many of you here, I believe.  I’m Acting State Architect.  My goal is to have a really collaborative, productive working group and to reduce the number of questions we get on the phone.  [Overlapping voices].  

M	I’ll bet. 

Jay	Jay Griffin, CASp.  I’m the Supervisor over Commercial Non-Structural Plan Review at the City of Sacramento.  And I agree with Steve, some language that would give us the ability to have consistent application of where they’re placed would be outstanding.  We see a lot of plans in the city and they are scattered everywhere, literally, to the point where they make no sense.  So, that would be my hope.  

Kristin	We’re going to go ahead and continue with introductions, as we have a few folks still joining us. 
 
Adam	Can you hear us?

Kristin	We can, yes.  Wonderful.  Hello.   

Barry	Hi.

Susan	Well, we’ll get to Barry [indiscernible].

Kristin	We have some folks on the line—

Adam	We can hear you guys.

Kristin	—working out their technical challenges.  

Susan	You know, I will go contact Adam and let him know what he needs to do to join.  

Kristin	Thank you.  As we’re continuing with some—we’re going to get these technical pieces worked out, and at our next meeting it will flow very smoothly, I’m sure.  So that was Sue Moe, who just stepped out of the room for a moment.  As she introduced herself at the beginning, for those that just joined us, she is an architect here at the Division of State Architects, and she will be one of the key people leading us through this effort.  

	As we move around the table to continue introductions, we are asking folks to share their name and organization, and if they have a goal for this process it would be helpful for us as we talk about detectable warnings, and also if there is a concern.  So, let’s continue right here.  

Rosa	Is that me?

Kristin	No, almost to you.  One more.  

Steve D.	Hi.  My name is Steve Dolim.  I’m an architect in CASp and [audio disruption] participation in this process.  

Kristin 	Thank you.  So, you’re next.

Rosa	I’m Rosa Gomez, and I appreciate the opportunity to be on this work group.  I appreciate the acknowledgement of there’s a lot of warnings detecting domes around, and more than that, I think the goal is that the end user has a better understanding of the purpose of the dome.  Right now, I think the domes give an alert, a warning, but there’s not enough information to be able to understand what the purpose is.  So, I hope that as we are working together that we can, for the end user, have these domes provide a little bit more information, and at the same time that it meets the needs of individuals who are blind and visually impaired, but also supports other individuals with disabilities and the general public.  

Kristin	Thank you, Rosa.  We’ll move to Jessica.

Jessica	Hi.  I’m Jessica Axtman.  I’m with DSA.  I’m just kind of background staff, so if anyone needs anything, throughout any of these meetings, please let me know.  

Kristin	Thank you.  Yes, we will move here to the end of the table.

Gene	Okay.  I’m Gene Lozano, representing the California Council of the Blind and the California Council of Citizens with Low Vision. 

M	 Hello?

Gene	I’m coming from an end user [audio disruption] and also I’m totally blind.  I’ve been involved with the detectable warnings for the blind in the beginning of it, in the mid-eighties in Sacramento, in which they were at 9th and L Street.  

	There are things that I agree that I’d like to see done.  One, is not diminishing the levels that we have of the detectable warnings, to actually exceed those in the [indiscernible] level.  There needs to be clarification, such as the location and some things like track areas, parking facilities, the driveways, platforms, transporting platforms, color issues, and resuming the detectable warning product certifications, which a lot of research is on, [indiscernible] answer some questions.

	I guess the big concern is we need to keep in mind disability issues for the general public that travel, but also recognizing that this is probably the most steadily researched [audio disruption] in the world and in the United States.  There’s a lot of history [audio disruption] who have other places in the world, so that’s [indiscernible] I don’t want us to forget about the research.  Thank you.

Kristin	Thank you, Eugene.  We will move to—

Chris	My name is Chris Downey.  My company is Architecture for the Blind.  I’m an architect, and I’ve been blind for ten years and worked a lot in the realm of designing for the blind and visually impaired.  Like a lot of the concerns, particularly around the table, I’m interested in clarity in terms of where they’re used in terms of consistency so that they’re effective and not confusing, and also interested in concerns for harmonization amongst different users.  

	And so to the extent that there’s some research out there, I’m curious where that stands and how to resolve and forward [ph] harmonize that.  Perhaps that’s all done, but that I understand not being necessarily the charge of this task force, it’s really how to implement things in the State of California.  So I’m excited about this opportunity.  

Kristin	Good.  Thank you, Chris.  We will now move to our remote participants.  This is anybody who is joining us via teleconference on their phone or a computer.  We will please just ask you to go ahead and chime in, again with your name, organization, and any hopes that you have for this process as well as any concerns you’d like to share.

Tim	This is Tim McCormick.  Can you hear me?

Kristin	We can.  Thank you.

Tim	Alright.  I have an architectural insurance firm in Los Angeles, McCormick & Associates.  We do a lot of accessibility consulting.  We also do a lot of design review of other architects, trying to understand where these things are supposed to go.  There is widespread confusion, and it will be very helpful if we can eliminate that as much as possible and simplify some of the languages.  

	I think, from where I stand, having a global picture of what we’re trying to accomplish here stated also in the code, the purpose of these devices and what we’re trying to accomplish will guide designers in where they go when the code cannot answer every question.  So I think that will be critical.  I think that the end game should be rules that are clear and concise and that give a predictable result for people who need to use these devices for guidance so that they can rely on them, and that they are used to guide them where it is safe to go and without stopping them from mobility generally.  

	Finally, I would say, resolving the issue about what constitutes an approved product, we have problems with materials in California.  We have an ADA standard that’s used sometimes instead of the wider CBC spacing.  We have products that really aren’t durable, and I know that a lot of building departments in particular that we work with are asking to only have DSA-approved products, and we have informed them that that process has not been completed, it doesn’t exist.	

	So I think giving a resolution or a plan to deal with the existing code language that requires those approvals and the reference standards should be part of this effort to actually globally address it all.  So, those are my thoughts.  Thank you for listening.  

Kristin	Thank you, Tim. 

Marsha	This is Marsha Mazz.  I’m Director of Accessibility Codes and Standards with the United Spinal Association.  Until last June I was the Director of the Office of Technical and Information Services at the US Access Board and served there for over 30 years, but this is my retirement job working at Spinal, and very much part-time.   

	But I think this is an incredibly important topic and one that has sort of dogged me my entire career.  I couldn’t agree more with Tim, you want clarity, you want consistency and you want to be able to predict a meaningful outcome for the end user. 

	I also believe that there is some value to using national model standards and to not necessarily having a unique standard that [indiscernible] issue for everyone in terms of obtaining the right product.  Certainly, durability is a big issue, and I think some of those issues with respect to durability can be addressed, should be addressed.  

	I’d like to revisit the color issues.  I’m not totally convinced that the research is there to support one color over another.  So, I’d be interested in seeing any new research that has been put on the table that maybe I’ve missed in the last few months.  

Kristin	Thank you, Marsha.  Do we have anybody else joining us remotely?

Vidal	Yes, this is Vidal Medina.  Can you hear me?  

Kristin	We can. 

Vidal	Yes, great.  First of all, I’m Vidal Medina with Resources for Independence Central Valley.  We’re one of 28 independent living centers in California.  My title is Assistant Change Advocate.  I want to first thank Susan for contacting me regarding this really important task force.  Like many who have already spoken, this has been if you’re legally blind or blind or have a disability, a wheelchair user, this has always come up in conversations with your friends and where you work and with other people as well. 

	One of the things I want to say is that one of my goals is kind of to present or representing all the groups who may be affected or in need of them, because there’s always the two sides to these things and I get conversations from people that love them and people that hate them.

	The other thing is, how is the location determined to use these?  That’s always been a question from folks that I’ve talked to.  The last one is kind of having a clarity on the purpose of them, that’s been a conversation between me and friends other folks, what is the real reason, and are we still using them for that or is it—sometimes it almost seems cosmetic, in a sense of how many are around particular buildings, as some have talked about.  So, that’s why I’m here.  Thank you.

Kristin	Good, Vidal.  I also see Jonathan on the line with us.

Jonathan	Yes, sure.  This is Jonathan Adler, principal consultant with Access Compliance Services.  I’m looking forward to clarifying what the code says is required, but then of course seeing new information added to the code where it is not clear.  I can definitely appreciate conciseness.  I think we all do.  More words can create greater clarity, but also confusion, and therefore, I rely on the old adage that a picture is worth a thousand words, and therefore, I’m hoping that this group activity spurs an interest in a DSA published white paper.  In other words graphic guidance, the way the Access Board at DOJ [ph] does to cover the various scenarios.  

	Lastly, I’m very excited to learn the perspective of members who are blind or low vision concerning detectable warnings and other measures that can provide guidance.  That’s it.

Kristin	Wonderful.  I see we also have Barry Ryan.

Barry	Yes.  Can you hear me okay?

Kristin 	We can.  

Barry	 Okay, I’m Barry Ryan at DSA Oakland, also retired and back.  I think from the perspective of the plan checkers here in Oakland, we are eternally confused by the use of detectable warning devices as they relate to undefined parking areas.  Large-scale parking areas where you have people interacting with vehicles, with no way of separating the two and how and where would detectable warnings apply, that, for us, is a very thorny and difficult situation to resolve.  

	I suppose, and again maybe I’m wrong, but hazardous vehicle areas—how do you define them?  Isn’t a hazardous vehicle area for a vehicle to pass across a sidewalk, and yet, we don’t use detectable warnings to determine or to separate the two.  Now, clearly it’s impractical in most instances, but there are some instances where the occurrence is continuous, such as a parking structure, and I’m not sure that we see hazardous warning tiles in those locations.  

Kristin	Thank you, Barry.  Also, do we have Kaylan with us?

Kaylan	 Yes.  This is Kaylan.  I’m here.  I’m Kaylan Dunlap with Evan Terry Associates in Birmingham.  I’m an Accessibility Specialist for the last, almost 16 years.  I’m a CASp and I’m also a manual wheelchair user, and I have flipped over because of detectable warnings on sidewalks and on curb ramps many times, so I have several different hats that I wear when I’m thinking about these.  I’m not going to repeat what Rochelle and Steve and Gene have already said, but that’s what I’m looking for. 

Kristin	Wonderful.  Welcome, everyone.  It’s wonderful to see that we have all 14 of our task force numbers here with us for our first meeting.  

Mike	Excuse me.  

Kristin	Oh yes, do we have one more?

Mike	Yes, I wanted to—[indiscernible] here.  This is Mike Gibbons. 

Kristin	Oh, Mike, I’m so sorry.  I didn’t see your name.  We were kind of following along with a screen.  Please, Mike, introduce yourself.  

Mike	Hi, I’m Mike Gibbons.  I’m a disabled access consultant.  I’m just really ecstatic about having the opportunity to talk about these issues, I mean, not to talk—we’ve been talking about these issues for so long, and everybody knows how I feel about truncated domes, they need a lot of help, they need a lot of work.  So I’m just glad that we’re taking a chance to try to work out some of these issues instead of talking about them. 

	I also just want to say, I’m ecstatic that Marsha’s here.  Hi, Marsha.  I’m glad that you’re not in retirement all the way.

Marsha	Hi, Mike. 

Mike 	She’s invaluable to us here.  I also believe that the federal standard is one that we absolutely have to look at and make sure that we comply with all that, and to me everything else is on the table as far as discussion, including that.  So thank you for letting me be here.

Kristin	Is there anybody else on the line?

Marsha	This is Marsha.  I do have one comment before we get started.  I’m not able to get into Blackboard.  It wants to access to my microphone, which I don’t have.  So, it won’t let me in.  If you would just mention which documents you’re on when you put them up, I’ll just follow along with the handouts that were emailed. 

Kristin	Okay.  Sounds good.  Thank you.

Susan	Marsha, this is Susan Moe, and right now up on the screen we just have the agenda. 

Marsha	Okay.  If you just mention what you’re putting up, I’m sure I can follow along.  I usually prefer that anyway, because the print is easier to read.  

Susan	Okay.  

Marsha	Thank you.  

Kristin	Good.  With that mentioned, we are going to turn to our agenda.  I’m just going to briefly preview our time together.  We are going to discuss the work plan for the task force, what the goals are for this effort as well as the timeline, and then we will hear a presentation about the rule-making process and have the opportunity to ask questions for clarification.  

	We do have a formal break scheduled, however, please, if anybody needs a break at any time, feel free to excuse yourself.  The restrooms here in this building in Sacramento are going to be out the doorways, and Debbie, can you tell us more a description?  

Debbie	To the right.  

Kristin	So when you go, they’ll be—

Debbie	Down the hall, to the right.

Kristin	Go out the door straight and then to the right.  So, we will have a break for that purpose, and then, we’re going to go ahead and just hear a little bit of initial input, as we already had when we did introductions, to get some feedback on the current code provision, and then we will end by discussing next steps.  

	This really is our kick-off meeting.  The hope is to get to know each other, understand what it is that we’re going to do together, and then begin discussions.  These meetings are closed meetings, which means they’re not open to the public at this time.  They are being recorded, so we will have official transcripts at each of our meetings as well as a brief summary, which will be just kind of a high level overview that can be useful if anyone does need to miss any of the meetings.  All of that will be posted for the public, though, the transcripts, is my understanding.  

	Let’s start by talking about how is it that we’ll work together.  I’d like us to briefly discuss what I like to call our group agreements.  You may have been in other meetings or conferences when these are called the ground rules, and I feel like we’re adults, we don’t need rules, but let’s just have some brief agreements here.  

	So expectation-wise, let’s silence electronic devices and let’s have respectful discussions.  So, Debbie is writing on a flow [ph] chart just so that we’ll have a record of our agreements here.  The first one, we have respectful discussions, and by that we are hoping that everybody can ask frank and tough questions, especially if needed to ask of each other, as we all have different abilities in this group, we want to have those questions asked for clarification or educational purposes.  For an example, please tell me your experience with someone who is visually impaired when you use these devices?  

	We also want it to be known that people have the option to decline to answer if they’re not comfortable.  We hope that you’ll also stay on topic.  Don’t worry, I’ll pull us in.  I’ll rein us in if we get off on a tangent.    

	Then turn taking.  For turn taking for our group agreement, some of us are on the phone or computer and others of us are in the room, we ask that you raise your hand, so to speak.  What that looks like if you are on your computer, there is a hand function that you should be able to press, and that lets us know that you would like to speak.  But if that doesn’t work, you can also just chime in at any time, because the line is open. 

	If you are here in the room, and you would like to speak, you can actually physically raise your hand, or we do have the option, so you can raise a paper just in front of you and I will see that and know that you would like to speak.  So, we’ll be turn taking, and with that in mind, under turn taking, Debbie, would you write, keep comments, let’s just say, succinct comments, and we’ll try to go two to four minutes.  We’re laughing in the room because she needed a spelling prompt.  

M	I don’t think that’s the word on the [indiscernible].  

Kristin 	 No shame in that.  It’s the worst to be in front of a group and all of a sudden forget how to spell something.  

Debbie	I wouldn’t know how to use that if I were—[indiscernible] I wrote quick.  

Kristin	Especially as some discussions in future meetings might be a little bit heated or everyone’s passionate about this topic, remember the two to four-minute rule.  

	Also, let’s also agree to not repeat comments.  What that would look like is perhaps Jay makes a brilliant comment, and then perhaps Steve wants to echo that, instead of repeating the comment, we would just ask that Steve would say, “I would like to voice support for Jay’s comment.”  And we ask for that in the interest of time, but also because we do want on the record to show where there is a lot of support for different ideas.  

Debbie	What is this called?

Kristin	These are going to be our group agreements.

Debbie	Group agreements, okay.

Kristin	One other to add up there, as mentioned, was silence electronic devices.  Does anybody have anything they’d like to add?  Yes?

Rosa 	Just so that we can get the names and voices, faces, can we say our names?

Kristin	Absolutely.  Thank you for reminding me of that.  That’s wonderful, Rosa. So, this would be introduce yourself before your comments.  It may begin to feel a little bit redundant, because we’ll get to know each other’s voices, but it would be really helpful.  So, please, each time you speak, just again, as I will share, this is Kristin Vandersluis, your facilitator, and then share a comment.  

	Yes?  We have a question here.

Jessica	That’s actually something we should have stated at the beginning, because we are doing a transcript.  It makes it easier for them to do it when you state your name before your comments.

Kristin	So, Rosa gets a prize.  Thank you so much.  Before we move on, anything to add?  Anything else?  Okay, so we all agree?  Oh yes, the phone.  Do we have a question from our remote attendees?  Oh, yes, Eugene.  Thank you so much.  

Gene	I would request as the facilitator if you would identify who you’re pointing to, to ask a question, and letting us know if it’s our turn.  

Kristin	Absolutely.  

Gene	But with a name.  

Kristin	Yes.  Wonderful.  Thank you, Eugene.  I will make an effort to state names when I’m calling on folks.  Thank you.

	Good.  Alright, so let’s move on.  Thank you, everybody, for sharing before some of your thoughts already.  Let’s talk about our work plan.  We’re going to pull up a document.  It’s the work plan document.  You can follow along.  If anybody needs additional time as they’re pulling a document, please feel free to speak up. 

	Really, the question is, why are we here?  Why have we been brought together?  The role of the task force members—I’m going to summarize what’s in this document—is we need each of you to advise, review and provide commentary during this process while we discuss the proposed amendment for the detectable warning regulations.  In other words, DSA needs your input so that they can understand the tough issues in a way that helps them to write clear and enforceable regulations as they draft those at the end of our process.  

	I know a tough word sometimes can be “consensus.”  We know we may not get consensus on a lot of these kind of nuances and subtopics, but I’d like to just pull out a little section from the work plan and read this to you.  It is DSA’s goal for the—and we’re just going to reference—call us the DWR Task Force.  DWR stands for Detectable Warnings Regulations.  That agreement can be reached on the major issues that have been or will be identified.  When agreement cannot be reached on an issue, the various positions will be documented and fully considered by DSA as it completes the initial draft of the proposed regulations.

	I wanted to read that for clarity and expectations so that we know we won’t necessarily be taking of some of these kind of subtopics as we go forward per se, but as we mentioned before, we will be interested in everyone’s opinions. 

	The main goal for us to be together is to ensure that at the end of the process, DSA can write code that will lead to reliable and predictable use of the detectable warnings.  What is mentioned in the work plan is that there will be a little bit of work in between meetings, so we do anticipate assigning you some homework in between sessions.  So, we’ll have some after this before our next one.  We don’t need this to be too labor intensive, but just know that that will be active as we move forward.  

	Our meeting dates—hopefully, everyone has a copy of this and has this all on their calendar, but as a review, we will be having five meetings in total.  They will all be on Wednesdays, once a month essentially.  Our next meeting is going to be February 13th.  So it’s very convenient that they will be held at the same time and the same location.  There is a chance we might change conference rooms within this building, but we’ll always be here in person.  So, Wednesday, February 13th followed by Wednesday, March 6th.  The next meeting again is Wednesday, April 3rd, again, from 1:30 to 4:00, and we anticipate our final meeting will be Wednesday, May 1st, again, 1:30 to 4:00.  

	As I mentioned before with documentation, there will be transcripts made at each meeting as well as brief summaries.  For information sharing purposes, a box.com online site will be created, and Susan will be emailing to everybody information about how to access that site.  That will be for our file sharing purposes.  So, you’ll hear more about that at the end of our meeting when we talk about our homework.  What’s very important is that this whole process be accessible to all participants, and all the materials will be provided in a Word document format, but can be read by Extreme Readers.  

	We want to, just before we move on, pose a question to the group.  Will everything that we’re discussing, use of a box.com site and Word document files and the way the meetings are set up, are these formats that work for our visually impaired participants?  Yes, Eugene?

Gene	I don’t have the skills for dealing with box.com.  I tried it, and I had problems with it.  That’s [indiscernible] and I have been receiving an alternative format in [indiscernible] from DSA.

Kristin	Okay.

Gene	Including the electronic, which I’d still like to do that.  It would be ideal, but I’m not asking it be done [indiscernible] simply Word happens to be [off mic].  

Kristin	Thank you.

Gene	[Indiscernible].

Kristin	Okay, so for those on the phone that may not have heard, Eugene’s request was that files continue to be sent to those electronically and that it may be challenging for some people to access box.com.  We do have Susan available to talk with participants offline about how we can make that more accessible, so let’s have the two of you connect after—

Gene	We talked to Susan, and Susan’s already taken some steps. 

Kristin	Wonderful.  Thank you, Eugene.  

Gene	I’m sorry for the interruption.

Kristin	No, you’re great.  This is how it works in a group.  Anybody else have input if this all will work for you, or, if you have other requests?  Yes, Rosa?

Rosa	I was just—this is Rosa and I was going to share.  I’m not actually familiar with box.com, so I’ll have to check that out and see if I have some of the same accessibility issues.  Otherwise, I’ll work with Susan to address the workaround.  I just wanted to share that. 

Kristin	Good.  Thank you.  

Gene	Yes. 

Kristin	Yes.  We’re having quite a few hands raised in the room, so let me move to Chris now.  

Chris	This is Chris.  I just wanted to reiterate that I’m too not familiar with that platform, but I suspect I’ll be able to handle it.  We’ll see.  If not I guess I’ll be speaking with Susan.

Kristin	Susan.  Yes, go ahead.

Steve D.	I’m just reiterating what Rosa said, it would be a new system for me.

Kristin	Well, me too.  So, we’re all in this together.  We will see how it goes.  Okay.  

Ida	We can probably just do an introduction into box on how to access it today, and then for those who prefer not to access it, then we can set up an alternate arrangement.  But at least we can introduce you to our box system.  

Kristin	Wonderful.  So, we’ll add that that at the end of our agenda today.  Any other thoughts before we move on?  

	That is our work plan—a very high level summary of that.  Does anybody have questions about the work plan?

	Alright.  Next, so I’m going to ask Susan to now give a presentation.  She is going to put up a PowerPoint presentation that is about the rule making process.

Marsha	Is it possible to email that presentation?  

Kristin	Would Jessica be able to do that?

Susan	Check your email, Marsha.  I think I sent it to you.  I sent you a PDF.  If you check your email, hopefully you got it.  

Marsha	Not at the moment.  

Gene	Was that this morning to everybody?

Susan	 No, this one is loaded up into the box. 

Gene	Oh, okay. 

Susan	So, for everybody, you will be able to download this one from the box after today’s session.  But after you mentioned, Marsha, that you couldn’t get to collaborate, I went to my desk and emailed it to you real quick, a PDF.

Marsha	Oh.  Alright.  

Jessica	Sue, do you want me to go and send it to everyone?

Susan	Oh, that’s a good idea.  Yes.

Marsha	Oh, there it is.  I have it.

Susan	 Got it?

Marsha	Thank you.

Susan 	Perfect, you’re welcome.  So, we put together just a brief training session here, just to give you an idea about the rule-making process and where we are in it and your role in the rule-making progress.  So, what we’re going to take a look at here is—as soon as I can advance this to the next slide.  Come along.  Come on.  I want that one.  No, I want it full page and I want it to advance.  

Kristin	You could go to your right and then scroll down to [indiscernible], yes.  

Susan	Let’s see.  Is that going to do it?  See, technology—don’t you hate this stuff?  You try it at your desk and it works just perfectly. 

Kristin	I’m going to jump in and help with the technology piece.  Will that forward?

Susan	No, that’s not going to do it either.  

Debbie	Does that mean you don’t have control, Sue?

Susan	 I—

Debbie	Barry’s name appears.  Maybe he has control.  

Susan	Yes.  This is a [indiscernible] slide to navigate to.  Here we go.  It’s just slow, I think.  Okay.  The first thing is, why is it a necessity?  Why does DSA need a task force?  First, we’re going to talk about the necessity and the role of a DSA task force. 

	So, when we take a look at this, what is a task force?  A task force is a small group that brings together a specific set of skills to accomplish a short term task.  You could call it an ad-hoc group or a working group, but by whatever name, a task force exists for a specific time-limited purpose.  That’s why we’ve only got a handful of meetings, so we can gather this information and move forward with that.  

	Then, why were you selected?  Well, individuals are selected for their expertise and to express different needs and perspectives.  When we started discussing this idea of a task force and we were looking at how this task force was going to operate and who we wanted to invite to participate, we looked at how people are impacted, how do people with vision impairments rely on detectable warnings, what impact do they have on users of mobility devices, for plan reviewers and building officials, what sorts of comments and questions do you get, because there is some ambiguity in the scoping provisions in the code. 

	So, that’s why we started to look at this and discuss it, and then that’s why we came up with a list of names of the people that we felt were a good blend of participants, and we looked at their willingness to really be open and to bring forward good dialogue to this process.  So, that’s why you were selected.

	Why do we convene the task force?  Well, we do that if we have as needed issues that require some additional research and development and opportunities for stakeholder input.  So, previous to this task force there was a group that was put together for the electric vehicle charging stations, so there were manufacturers, there were people from the utility district, from SMUD, there were persons who used mobility devices, we just had a really diverse group taking a look at those electric vehicle charging stations.  

	Then another one—and this is for the adult changing facilities, and this code change proposal for the adult changing facilities was approved by the Building Standards Commission back in December.  That was a specific group that was put together who really needed what could be provided in those adult changing facilities.  And at least from my perspective I think it is so helpful to understand when somebody uses those facilities exactly, how do they use the elements within those facilities and what do they need to make their task easier.  

	Now, we’re up to the detectable warnings task force, and our next task is to take a look at how can we make the code provisions a little bit clearer for detectable warnings.  

	Really, what this does, the information that’s gathered during the task force meeting assists the DSA and the staff when we develop code change proposals that are then submitted to the public for review and comment.  We’re going to go through this process first.  We’re going to hopefully learn a lot from this process, then we’re going to determine what do we do next, and we’re going to start taking a look at what we do to put together potential code change proposals so that we can move forward through what’s called the pre-cycle activities in the rule-making process.

	When we look at why we consider code change proposals and those changes, we look at, is there a demonstrated need?  Is there a requirement that these changes be made?  We take a look at that and then we say DSA and Access code and policy, we say, yes there is a need.  We need to take a look at this; we need to do some code change proposals.  

	Sometimes, we don’t need the services of a task force, but in this case we do.  So then, we convene a task force.  We go through this information gathering session.  Then from here, we’ll do public outreach, and that still is in what’s called the pre-cycle activities.  After these sessions, then we have some tentative dates for public outreach, and then those sessions are just going to be open to the general public, so anybody can participate in those sessions.  

	In this task force, we’re going to limit participation to the 14 people who have been invited to participate.  So, we go through that process, we gather up this information, we do some more research as necessary.  We really start to digest this.  We begin to put together those code change proposals.  Then we’re going to go into those public meetings.  

	Then at some point, if this does move forward and we’re going to proceed with these code change proposals, then we’re going to get what’s called our express terms put together and our statements of reasons, and then that’s going to go to the Code Advisory Committee at the Building Standards Commission.  So you guys are here even before we’re really into what I would say is the majority of the pre-cycle activities.  So, we can get ourselves prepped for all of that.

	Ida, jump in any time—and I’ll let you take the wheel any time you would like. 

Ida	You’re doing just fine.

Susan	Alright.  The other thing—there’s different sources for code change proposals.  There are different reasons why we say, okay, we need to take look at a particular item and we need to consider this for a code change proposal.  

	We look at what is the impact on the built environment?  First, there’s the expression of a problem.  Is there a problem?  Well, obviously from what we’ve heard, there is a problem with the detectable warning.  There’s problems with scoping.  There are some issues with detectable warnings.  

	Then we take a look at that and we say, okay, well, is it an enforcement issue?  Is it operational?  Is it a regulatory issue?  In previous additions of our rule-making cycles, we would take a look at this, and we realized that there were some provisions in the code that were really operational and it wasn’t anything that a building official really would have any control over.  

	One of the things was accessible cashier checkout stations at a grocery store, and if they closed the checkout aisles and they reopened those, they had to be sure to reopen one that was accessible.  Well, a building official won’t have any input on that.  So, let’s just take a look at that and say, well, is this something that we can address in the building code itself?  Then we also look at it and we say, well, can advocacy or training produce the desired result to address the need?  I would say for what we have right now for the scoping provisions in the building code, probably not.  I don’t know that training would be sufficient to answer the questions.  

	Then we come down to, will a building code regulation address the problem?  Will that really address what we need?  In looking at what we’re focusing on right now, I would say yes, if we can clean up the scoping provisions, maybe even some of the technical provisions, I would say that that would address the problem.  

	Then can a regulation be enforced?  If you don’t have clear, enforceable regulations, that’s when you’re going to end up with a lot of ambiguity; one authority having jurisdiction, one building department might look at it one way and another building department might look at it and interpret it in another way.  So, we went to be sure that it’s clear and it’s enforceable, that it can be designed to the code, you can do plan review and approval to it, and when it’s something that’s constructed and the building inspector is out there, he can look at it and say, yes, I can understand from what the code reads that this complies or it doesn’t.  

	Then we have to always take a look, will the regulation create unintended and potentially negative consequences?  We want to be sure that sometimes you can have the best intent, but then when the code actually goes into use, it might not have the result that you thought it would have.  

	Then, is the regulation reasonable to all who are impacted?  So we have to take a look at everybody, because when we look at Chapter 11B, it’s for all of the citizens of the State of California.  So, we really have to look at that and say, is it reasonable for everybody who is impacted by these regulations?  

	Then, sometimes what happens when we have to take a look at a code change proposal, it could be a legislative mandate, the adult changing facilities, that was Assembly Bill 662, and it added Section 19952.5 to the health and safety code for the adult changing stations.  Then when you have a statute like that and it says you have to have an adult changing station, okay, how are you going to build that adult changing station?  What is it going to look like?  So, then we had to develop regulations, and that was done during the 2018 Triennial Code Adoption Cycle.  That would be for the 2019 code.  So, that’s what we did.  We developed these regulations to be able to clarify what the intent is of that state legislative mandate.  

	The other thing that might happen—there could be some changes to the federal standards, because in 2012 we went through the rule-making process and completely re-wrote Chapter 11B and used the 2010 ADA standards as model code.  At some point, potentially the public right of way guidelines will be adopted, so we might have to take a look at that.  The outdoor developed area guidelines, those are applicable to the national parks, so at some point if they are adopted for state parks—now, I know the California Parks Department, they used the outdoor developed area guidelines as best practices, but at some point we might take a look at that and write that into Chapter 11B.  

	The other rule-making that is on hold right now, but what they’re taking a look at is regulations for medical diagnostic equipment—those standards, so at some point that might be something that we’d have to take a look at.  

	Sometimes, the code changes proposals are staff initiated.  We’ll take a look at a section in the code, and maybe we get a lot of questions from code users and we decide that, you know what, this is something in the California amendment that we need to make some modifications and some amendments to. 

	Then the Access Code Collaborative, the items proposed to the Access Code Collaborative—what happens with the participants in the Access Code Collaborative, what we look to from that group is that they get input from their constituency that they represent.  They might come up with an issue that they would like to propose that we need to take a look at for a code change.

	Then sometimes it’s stakeholder-initiated.  Anytime during the rule-making cycle, you can refer an item to the Division of the State Architect, and we get several of those every rule-making cycle, where someone is looking at a code and they have a suggestion, so they might submit to us a code change proposal and we’ll take a look at that and consider it.  

	Then where we are with the task force, we convened the task force so we can see what we can develop for the code change proposals for the detectable warnings.  What we’re looking for is we want some additional research potentially and why we’re here, and that’s discussion by the persons affected by what we’re going to propose.  
	
	There’s criteria for consideration of code change proposals.  When we submit the standards to the Building Standards Commission for approval, there are requirements in the health and safety code.  It’s Section 18930A, and there’s a nine-point criteria analysis that you have to go through, and what that looks at is it unambiguous, is it clear?  Anyway, there’s nine points that we have to look at whenever we look at code change proposals.  
	
	Then there’s the Administrative Procedures Act, and that requires a Form 399, and what that looks at is economic and fiscal impact statement.  That has to be submitted to the Department of Finance whenever we propose code changes, and that has to go into our rule-making file.  We have to take a look at, is there going to be any financial impact for what we’re doing.  

	Then we look at, the code change proposal, can we do that in the current code cycle?  Do we have enough time, where are we in that code cycle, that we can develop the language for their code change proposals so that we can present that in that public forum.  Sometimes, depending on the extent of that code change proposal, we might have to put that off for a future code cycle.  
	
	You know, I think I need to do is actually a PowerPoint presentation and save it as a PDF, and then we won’t have our text running over on the footer on our slide.

	Sometimes we have code change proposals that come in and we can’t consider those for either our current or our future code change proposal just because of the constraints.  So, sometimes people come up with suggestions, and it just isn’t something that the building code can address.  

	As we move through our process, after the code change proposals are vetted by DSA staff to meet that nine-point criteria analysis and the financial impact, then we go through this process, and those code change proposals are posted on the DSA website.  Then that gives everybody, all the stakeholders, all the code users, an opportunity to review and analyze the potential code change proposals as we continue on with our rule-making process.  

	So, as we move through this process, when we go through these public meetings we’re going to hear a lot from people during the meetings, after the meetings, all these comments that come in.  We’re going to take a look at all of this and analyze it and say, well, you know, this person is correct.   We might have to make some minor changes to what we’re proposing for the code.  

	Then some of the activities and the timelines for the rule-making activity, what will happen in the Building Standards Commission—what they do, they put together a timeline for the Intervening Code Adoption Cycle or the Triennial Code Cycle.  We finished up the Triennial Cycle.  That one is done.  Now, we’re into the Intervening Code Adoption Cycle.  That’s what we’re going to be working on now.  Like I said, at some point, those dates will be posted on the Building Standards Commission website.  So, we’re still way before that happens, because we’re in these pre-cycle activities.  

	So we’re going to have the stakeholder meetings.  We’re going to focus on the disability community code issues.  We’re going to look at stakeholder code issues.  We’re going to prioritize the code issues that we’re taking a look at.  Then we’re going to refine those code change proposals.  Then we’re going to post those lists of potential code changes on the DSA website.  As it says, a task force is convened as needed, and again that’s why we’re here, because we realize that this is one of those issues that really needs a task force.
	Then what we’ll do—the DSA schedules, the pre-submittal public hearings to present the code change proposals are going to be posted on the DSA website.  Then as we hear form the participants when we go through that process, as we hold those various meetings, those public outreach meetings, as those code change proposals move along you’re going to see maybe a few changes here and there, just as those code change proposals get refined, as we hear comments from the participants.  

	Then we continue to vet those in those public hearings prior to giving the Code Advisory Committee submittal prior to getting all that put together.  Then we prepare that preliminary submittal for the Building Standards Commission Code Advisory Committee, and then they get a binder of all these documents that we’ve put together.  

	That’s kind of the process that we’re going to be going through.  So, like I said, we’re in the pre-cycle activities.  We’re gathering information.  We’re going to start to develop code language, and we’re going to have those public meetings as we move along and we decide, yes, we’re going to move forward in this code cycle, and we’ll put all that together and get ready to go to the Building Standards Commission to the Code Advisory Committee.  Then it will go to them.  There will be more public input before it goes through the final review by the Building Standards Commission itself, and may or may not be approved by the Building Standards Commission.  

	Questions?

Ida	Can I just ask one thing?  Just to understand that we’re going to do a lot of—sorry, this is Ida.  Thank you.  We’re going to do a lot of important work here.  Unfortunately, sometimes we do work and it doesn’t realize into something that we expected, and we need you to be aware of this.  We described the code change process, there’s a lot of input that happens even after we do our work here.  We will try to always loop you back in if there’s something critical, but we have arrived sometimes at the end of the code cycle and feel like it’s not ready to have something move forward, which means that it will need to continue.

	So I don’t want an expectation that this ends.  That’s our goal, we hope it ends in a very fruitful endeavor, but just to understand there’s an expectation that the discussion may need to continue.  

Kristin	Thank you.  That was a lot of helpful information.  Let’s open this up for questions for clarification.  

Kaylan	Hi, this is Kaylan.  

Kristin	Yes, go ahead, Kaylan.  

Kaylan	I didn’t mention when I introduced myself earlier, I’m on that Access Code Collaborative Advisory Committee, just for the sake of full disclosure, so everybody knows that.

Kristin	As was Gene.

Susan	Yes, correct.  Gene was on that collaborative as well.

Kristin	And Vidal.

Susan	 Oh, yes, Vidal too.  Yes.

Kristin	 Good.

Mike	Do I have to disclose that?  This is Mike.

Kristin	Goodness, what else do we need to disclose?  I thought it would be helpful—this is Kristin—for the benefit of the group to talk about timing.  I know it’s impossible to nail down a date or a year, and I know you had mentioned the hope that it would be in the next code cycle, but it’s possible it may not.  Can you give the group a ballpark?  Is this something that may be realized in the next three years, ten, is there any way to even—

Ida	There is no ballpark really.  Again, our target goal is this code cycle, where we can be the task force [audio disruption] in a code cycle, with the end result that there will be change.  But because we can receive comments up until 45 days, and then if we change something a 15 day [ph] and a comment period for the public.  

	And then if there’s still another comment that arrives, there may not be a time to address that issue in the 15 days.  If there isn’t, it will need to be tabled and moved forward.  Obviously, we don’t want to see it extend to two, we would like to see it contained in one, but I just want to set the expectation that it is a very public, transparent process and no one individual or process is more important than the other, or [indiscernible] than the other.  It’s all a matter of having that open discussion.  

	Of course, it has happened before, where someone at the very last minute raises an issue and we say, wow, we didn’t think of that.  That could have unintended consequences.  Okay, we have no more time to discuss this, we’re going to have to pull it, we’re going to have to withdraw it and bring it back.  

Susan	We’re always on an 18-month cycle, so we just finished up that triennial code, which is the 2019 code that becomes effective January 1st of 2020, so now we’re into that intervening code cycle, so we’ll have the intervening code cycle, and then after that another triennial cycle.

Ida	The whole package doesn’t get withdrawn, it is regulation by regulation.  So, we proceed with less code cycle with—I don’t know how many regulations, well, it was quite a bit, and we did end up withdrawing forward [ph].  So, you know, there is an opportunity where that could happen.  Yes, just setting the expectations.  Yes.

Susan 	Well, we had quite a few code change proposals and some of them were fairly significant—  

Ida	Yes. 

Susan 	—that got approved.  

derek	This is Derek Shaw, I’m staff with DSA [audio disruption].  If these discussions of detectable warning regulations come forward with some proposals for change and DSA carries that forward, the earliest date at which those changes would become effective, and that would be in the 2019 intervening code cycle, the earliest date would be July 1 of 2021.  It is a rather lengthy process, and for this particular code cycle, we’re at the very beginning of that process.  

Kristin 	Thank you.  This is Kristin.  I’m very grateful for all of the explanations.  I know I don’t have the rule-making background and I know a lot of us, this may be new.  So, thank you for that.  

Susan 	Now, one thing—this is Susan Moe—what we do have an opportunity to do if we do find that we come away with some information during this session that we feel would help with what’s called our DSA advisory manual, DSA has advisories that we incorporate into that manual that are not regulatory, and there would be the potential that we could at least add some advisories into our advisory manual as we’re kind of working through this process, if we find that there could be some information that would offer a little bit of clarity to what the existing regulations are.  

Ida	Right.  This is Ida.  That measure [ph] adds guidance, but it’s not regulatory, so it’s really up to the code users to determine if they want to take that guidance, but it is provided there to add that additional clarity.

Kristin	Thank you.

Ida	Can I add, sorry. I have one more issue too, just to manage expectations.  Understand that when these regulations go into the California Building Code and if our work is perceived as planned and actually ends in enforceable regulations, which would be July 1, 2021, understand that it is only those projects that take alteration for new construction where there will be regulatory.  In other words, there is no retroactive provisions.  So because this affects us in our environment, understand that even when we pass regulations that we want to be more predictable, it’s going to take time and change in order for that to be visualized, so that its effect as intended, because there will be still many installations and detectable warnings that will not abide by the new regulations.  It doesn’t mean that they are wrong.  It just means that until an alteration is undertaken on existing installations, they will exist.  

	So, there is no magic, because the regulations pass, now the oceans will part and everything.  It’s pretty confined.  So, I do want you to understand that expectation as well.

Kristin	Good.  What other questions about the rule-making process?  I’m looking side to side and just checking in with our remote participants.  We did not see anyone’s hand raised, so unless we hear from anyone, we assume complete understanding.  We will hold you to that.  No, that was a joke.  

	Unless there are any other comments or questions, let’s go ahead and take a break.  We’re going to have a 15-minute break.  So, it is now about almost 2:45, we will reconvene about a minute or so right before 3:00 and jump back into our discussion.  Thank you, everyone.  

[Break taken]

Kristin	Well, I hope everyone had a nice break.  It is 3:00, and we’re going to jump back into our session.  We are—

Susan	I just brought up the current code provision, that document, and I don’t know if that’s what we wanted next, but okay.

Kristin	We would like to go ahead and talk about the current code provision.  Sue, would you like to say anything about these before we—

Susan	The document that we put together and emailed out to everybody, what I included in this document—let me zoom that up a little bit more.  We have the definition for the access aisle; a definition, I included that for the detectable warning; and then the definition for a pedestrian way.  And then, what I included are all the sections for scoping from the current code, and then as you scroll down through this document, you see that it also has the technical provisions from the current code as well.

	Now, some of the technical provisions, we aren’t going to be able to do changes to that, like the one where it’s the figure that actually shows the height of the detectable warning, because it’s an absolute dimension from the federal regulations, or standards.  But that’s what we put together in this document, just so everybody has, in one document, all the scoping and the technical provisions, and some of those definitions related to detectable warning.

Ida	Can I clarify something?  

Susan	Sure.

Ida	Does this document have the italic word, California, and the—

Susan	No.  This one is just—

Ida	We may want to do that again, just so that we know that when we’re looking at federal language, we’re looking at federal language versus California language.

Susan	Yes, I can tweak that and we can—

Derek	It’s all California language.  For readability—

Ida	So typical about the height of the domes and stuff?

Derek	Because it has been shifted around in different sections [audio disruption].

Susan	Oh, and renumbered?

Derek	And renumbered, yes.

Ida	Got it, okay.

Derek	So, for readability, even though it does appear in the code in italics, Sue and I just discussed this.

Ida	Oh, sorry.

Derek	I suggested that we put it in—

Ida	No, that’s fine, that makes sense. 

Susan	So, I guess with that, did we—go ahead.

Kristin	You may or may not have had a chance to look over this ahead of time.  We do have the file if you’d like to look at this, but before we talk about this a bit more, a question that we had, as a group. when we got together to plan today’s session, we were curious how each of you were educated for how to apply the detectable warning with the way that the current code language is specified.

	I don’t know if you want to clarify, Sue.

Susan	I think the other thing that we were thinking, in talking to some of the facilities where they train persons with vision impairments how to navigate through their environment, what we were hearing from some of these educators is that they don’t train to the detectable warning to be able to locate those and what their meaning is.  

	And there is one gentleman that we heard from, and he said his issue was reliability.  And he said the problem is, like let’s say at a crosswalk, he said he couldn’t rely on the detectable warnings, because at the four corners of a crosswalk there might be detectable warnings at two of the curb ramps, and there aren’t detectable warnings at the other side of that crosswalk.  

	So that’s what we heard, is that for some persons they aren’t being trained to even use the detectable warning to navigate their environment because they’re not reliable.

Kristin	As a reminder, before everyone chimes in, to please state your name again before you share your input.  So we’re going to begin with Eugene.

Gene	It’s not the detectable or warning that’s not reliable.  It’s that fact that it has not been installed correctly.  Keep in mind that when, back in the ‘70s, the program started to become required, there was a [indiscernible] at the lower end of the curb ramp to delineate the gutter from the leading edge of the run of the ramp, that was [audio disruption].  Then ADA got a flush transition and then research was done to find out that the slope [audio disruption] of the run, how steep it is, so gradually the slope [indiscernible] did find that there were people going out on the street not detecting it.

	So when they put the detectable warning, they did do tests, and they found there was a significant increase of detectability, but the reliability aspect has not been [indiscernible] detectable warning, which needs a few things on it like slip resistance.  But it’s the fact that it has not been installed everywhere, and that is because [audio disruption] property has not—or there hasn’t been a change at the location, so they haven’t updated the ramps or anything like that.  So that needs to be kept in mind.

Kristin	Thank you.  

Tim	Can we get the speakers volume increased for those of us on the phone?

Susan	Okay.

Tim	Thank you.  

Susan	Tim, this is Susan Moe, and I turned up the volume.  That’s a good reminder that we should all speak with our outdoor voices so the people on the phone can hear us.

Kristin	Yes, so Chris next.

Chris	I think in particular with that comment, that’s where it goes back into the context of what the Division of State Architect can do.  They can’t regulate the training of blindness training agencies.  In some agencies they don’t encourage learning braille, that’s their problem.  So the detectable warnings, the issue is really if they’re effective in doing it.  So I think it’s important to be clear that, because some people aren’t training to it, doesn’t mean that they’re not effective.  It’s just an issue of the philosophy behind the training at that location.

	The fact that it’s there, you may not be able to rely on it at every location, but once it is there it brings absolute clarity to the situation and adds real value.  That’s one point I wanted to add.

Kristin	Thank you.  Rosa?

Marsha	This is Marsha.  

Kristin	We’re going to have Marsha speak, and then Rosa, and then we will go over to Steve and then Ida.

Marsha	In line with what Chris said, I just want to point out that the vast majority of people with vision loss do not get trained, or they get very, very minimal training.  So I would not necessarily rely on the trainers to tell us whether these devices are useful.  I think it’s more important to get that feedback from the users.

Kristin	Thank you.  Rosa?

Rosa	Yes, this is Rosa.  I’m with the Department of Rehabilitation, I forgot to mention that at the introduction, so I had the opportunity to discuss with our residential program that has mobility instructors about the training on the detectable warning.  And one of the concerns that often comes up is that it would be helpful, and I believe that I did see in code, that they should be placed so that it helps to provide direction.  

	However, their experience has been that the placement does not provide information as to which direction, and the ways that they are placed actually gives a message to the user that they should cross a certain direction, when actually it puts them out diagonally into traffic, versus the direction that they really should be traveling.  Obviously, a person needs to have good mobility, but still, if you’re going to rely on that, it should be placed accurately.

	I think in addition, in looking at the code, there’s a lot of information about the width and depth of these warning detections that I was not aware of.  And I think that oftentimes instructors are not aware, so they don’t really train to know that if it’s 36 inches, it means this, this, and if it’s 24 it means that.  

	And it’s a lot of information to have to retain.  I think I would, if I was to give an analogy, say that if we took away all the existing stop signs and stop lights, and instead installed a blinking blue light, and that the user would have to know if it’s two blinks it means this, and if it’s three blinks it means that, but then, if it’s a two-second blink it means something different than a three-second blink.  It’s all kind of the same information.  It’s too much to have to retain.  So is there something that could be done to [indiscernible] that 

Kristin	Good, thank you.  So Steve’s next.

Steve	What I see a lot during my inspections, when I do a CASp inspection or when I do a plan review—my training’s, basically, almost self-taught in a lot of ways, and being part of a CAD team and being part of a building department, and those kinds of things, so talking with peers, and I got my CASp certification on my own.  

	But what my understanding is, is the concept behind it, is that if you walk down a walkway, for example, and you hit a detectable warning, that’s to warn you that you’re about now to step into a “hazardous traffic area.” That’s the definition, which maybe can be discussed too.  But then when you reach another one, it’s to indicate that you’re safe.  And if you hit another one, now you’re back into traffic area, and then you hit another one you’re safe.

	Now, that example, that might be if you’re in a commercial building, for example, and you’re going into accessible parking across traffic lanes into the parking areas, you might see these series of truncated domes.  Well, it works in one direction, but it may not work coming back the other direction.  So, in that regard, it’s kind of confusing. 

	Another thing that I see a lot is the way they’re building buildings now, they build them flush with parking and the drive aisle.  They’re not up on a curb like we always used to see them back in the day.  They’d always have a curb, so you’d always have it as a detectable warning for you to step off of the traffic aisle.  Now I see a lot of, especially industrial buildings and stuff in the Rancho area, they’re flush with the drive aisle, so what do you do when you walk out the door?  You’re already in the traffic area.  So do we put truncated domes along with doormats [ph] along there?  Do we just put one and say, once you’re out there it’s game on, you’re all out in the danger zone?  

	So there’s a lot of that kind of stuff that I see all the time that is—I think, back to somebody’s point earlier about the concept behind it, what’s the concept, how do you know where you are in that whole big picture if you’re visually impaired?

Kristin	Good.  

Susan	And after Ida we have a handout, that’s Michael Gibbons.

Kristin	Wonderful.  So Ida and then Eugene, and then we’ll go to Mike.

Ida	So I think that that was the direction of this question, Steve, that I wanted to clarify.  I find it interesting, Chris, of course, was on 60 Minutes, and there was a comment in that episode that the gentleman at the Lighthouse for the Blind said that most people when they become blind have never met a blind person before.  And so, to me, I think taking in consideration that fact, there perhaps are a lot of myths surrounding how detectable warnings are used, and we’re getting them, not necessarily from blind people, but we’re getting them from code enforcers, or we’re getting them based on assumptions.  

	And I think that that’s part of the question that I wanted to ask is, when we talk about how [indiscernible] are trained, it’s really, and just kind of clarifying those kind of ideas, do you use them in sequence?  Are there certain areas where you can rely on them more than others?  And sometimes that may not be from a perspective of being educated on how to use them.  It could just be how you use them, a very personal thing.  

	In your environment when you encounter them, what are the issues that you see, just holistically, not necessarily how it’s tied to code language.  Because we read code language and that’s how we interpret them, and then we get these ideas on how they work, kind of like it’s a  math problem, but as a user, navigating your environment, whether you use them, whether you’ve taught yourself, or whether you were taught how to use them, all these different ideas.  I think we’re trying to maybe dispel some of the myths in that perspective if we can, because we don’t know if they’re true.

Kristin	Good.  Eugene?

Gene	I’d like to comment on a few things.

Kristin	Yes.

Gene	The detectable warnings, I want to echo what some people have said, they’re only made to warn when you’re leaving the pedestrian way and entering vehicular way.  It takes the place of where a curb line might be.  To have an area where the whole, maybe the length of the sidewalk, from corner to corner, is flush with the adjoining roadway or parking lot, and to put the detectable warning is overkill, it’s expensive, and that’s where, like putting a curb, or if the sidewalk’s not raised, but at least having a curb with brakes in it so that people can walk or wheel through it.  That is an option, but as you read the law or the regulations, you would have to have the detectable warnings.

	The work has been done showing that the Feds have a minimum of 24 inches and about—it’s been a while since I looked at the data, but something a little over 85% of there’s foot detection [indiscernible] 36 inches, it gets closer to about 97%, 48 inches is supposed to be 100%.  And it makes a difference, too, is how effective is the footwear you’re wearing, and how it’s a thick sole shoe.  

	I’m having, because I’m having a foot problem, a walking boot on one of my feet, and I can’t feel the truncated domes on it, where leather soled shoes you can.  When you have proper footwear, and I don’t mean that you have to go out and buy special shoes, I just mean what is realistic, the average person has there, the 36 inches provided, as we did a lot of working with cross-disabilities where the 36 was a compromise, I’m not saying it came easy, but it was [indiscernible].  And, yes, as Rosa said, standardization, harmonization, having one set depth is helpful.  But it’s having the one that gets the majority, not all, but the majority of the people with the run slope.

	Just an example where it’s confusing for me at times, and I can’t get to specific locations, but it’s San Francisco and here in Sacramento, I’ve come where we’ve had a large parking facility, just using the term in the code, and where you have these driveways, multiple driveways adjacent to one another, with maybe four or five feet between the columns, the wall between the exit or entry [indiscernible].  And the thing is, they have put detectable warnings because it’s flush to the sidewalk, there isn’t like a recessed area, and you walk, you hit one detectable and you cross the driveway, hit another set of detectable warnings, then about four feet of space [indiscernible], then you start another one and another one.  Well, the thing is, you don’t need, in my opinion, all those detectable warnings.  

	The only thing you need is to have the far edge on both sides of that whole series of driveways, just having one bound border of detectable warnings on one side as you go across that whole series of driveways, because you’ve been alerted, this is vehicular area, it’s dangerous, whatever.  Then you find another row, a border of detectable warnings, and you know that area is ended and you’ve entered the pedestrian area.

	And I agree to the issue about parking stalls out in the middle of parking mall lots, where you’re away from the curb, you don’t need detectable warnings there.  But there might be exceptions where there’s a bus stop out there, or a raised pedestrian walkway that goes to that parking lot where you need brakes in there for traffic.  
	So those are things we should look at, but, yes, there are places that it’s just overkill.  As much as I believe in detectable warnings, and I found them to be very effective, and I find you can self-teach yourself just after using it a few times, but again, I want to stress they never were designed, and do not provide directionality themselves at all.  Thank you.

Susan	And Michael Gibbons.  

Kristin	Great.  Michael.

Susan	Yes.

Kristin	So, Michael, if you’re still with us and you want to unmute your line, we would like to hear your input.

Marsha	This is Marsha, if I could go after Michael.

Mike	Sorry.  Oh, I got it to work.  

Kristin	Marsha, we’re going to let Mike go first.

Mike	Oh, pardon me?

Kristin	Mike, please proceed.

Mike	Okay, thank you.  I get calls on this every day.  In my practice, we deal with everybody from different factions, and we get questions from the building officials and the plan checkers, and from the architects and the contractors, and also in the litigation, people asking questions.  And I absolutely agree with what Gene is talking about.  

	Two of the issues are overuse and the second one is the biggest question that’s asked constantly, and it’s always an issue, is the location, the place where you’re supposed to put these.  It doesn’t come down to whether you can feel them with your feet, or what color they are, whatever, it comes down to where and when do I put these, and limit that as much as possible, so they actually become effective, and people can stick with a standard that they’re always using.

	I mean, if we can just locate one area on this.  The biggest area that’s been a problem in California and everywhere, is 11B-247, per a 125, for the hazardous vehicular areas.  It’s huge, in that it’s so encompassing in the way that it’s written.  If we can just decide where to go from here and get one area, and decide where we’re going to put these and where we’re not going to put them, which is a huge question in itself, we’ve accomplished a huge amount.

Kristin	Thank you.  Next we’ll hear from Steve.  Oh, I’m sorry, Marsha, and then Steve.  Thank you.

Vidal	This is Vidal.  I have a comment, too.

Kristin	I’ll put you on the list.

Vidal	All right, thank you.

Marsha	First, I think we need to decide whether we’re really talking about detectable warnings or tactile guidance systems.  And if we’re talking about detectable warnings, then we are truly talking about a way of signaling to a blind pedestrian that he’s about, or she’s about to enter a vehicular area—a vehicular area.  We’ll talk about which vehicular areas perhaps later.

	But if it’s a guidance system, then that is a different thing altogether, and there are international standards on guidance systems, most notably used in Japan and parts of Europe.  I don’t think we’re talking about guidance systems, but I could be wrong.  If we’re talking about detectable warnings, I think that there are some major issues that we probably should get on the table without comment, without staking out a position, but just get the issues on the table so that we can budget our time.  

	The first would be, where would these be best required?  The second would be the technical criteria, in other words, the dome size and spacing, the contrast, the sound on canes, and the color issues, I think all of which are controversial in their own way, and we probably need to focus in on each of those issues and make some decisions about those.

	I mean, I can be honest that I’m very supportive of detectable warnings, but I do think that they are overused, particularly in parts of California.  I never, ever want to see a walkway paved with them.  That’s just hazardous for everybody, including myself, as a person with low vision, who doesn’t always have great balance.

	So I think we need to find appropriate compromises among the various groups that are affected by these, and we need to focus in on where they’re most needed.

Kristin	Thank you, Marsha.  Next we’ll hear from Steve and then Rosa.

Steve D.	I would echo a lot of what Michael Gibbons said about the hazardous vehicular area being the highest controversy in my experience of practice.  Specifically, in large parking fields where you have 10 or 20 accessible parking stalls in a general walking surface, what that means sometimes varies from yellow outline on everything you walk on, to exactly what you all see.  So if we can accomplish something on that, I think we’d made a major dent.

Kristin	Thank you.  Rosa?

Rosa	I have a question.  The way I use the warning detection is to, if I’m walking down—especially in an area that I don’t know is where it’s most beneficial.  But if I’m walking down the street, to let me know I’m coming to a street, obviously I listen to the traffic as well, so I have other cues, but it just gives that double reinforcement.  Where it can become confusing is when those domes show up at a driveway, for example.  So I think, okay, this is not an area I know, this must be a street, I’m standing here waiting.  [Indiscernible] in traffic, but is there a light, that kind of thing.  And somebody might say, oh, it’s safe to cross.  It’s just a driveway, that kind of thing.  So I guess that information, I learn about it.  

	Eugene was talking about inside, like parking lots, where there are multiple adjacent kind of vehicle, I guess, areas.  When you’re on the third floors [ph] or fifth strip, one, I don’t count my strips, but to say, okay, wait a minute, am I now standing in a safe zone, or I am in the street, because there’s too many of them to now be able to figure out—and there isn’t always a great traffic flow to be able to read, so now it’s confusing, it’s way too much information.  I think that’s been iterated.  

	A way to resolve it is perhaps—and I know, I learned from the code, that there’s actually, I believe it’s when you’re coming to a street crossing it makes a noise, but if you’re on an island it doesn’t make the noise.  So it’s something new to learn, and if you’re using a cane, maybe the feet or the nails will sound a little different, I’ll have to check that out.

	But perhaps if we have different types of textures to be able to have a better read of what the strip is meaning might be helpful to resolve the too much information.

Steve D.	I have a question as far as that—

Kristin	Before we move to the next person in line, Steve has a question for Rosa.

Steve D.	So to follow that up, Rosa, when you’re going through a series of detectable warning patch after patch, and you’ve lost count and you don’t know quite if you’re in a safe zone or not, do the curbs on either side ever provide clues for you, or is that just so, sometimes it’s so wide it’s not reliable?

Rosa	Yes, sometimes there’s not enough information, sometimes there aren’t curbs, or sometimes I can find, okay, there’s dirt here on the right, so I must be on the sidewalk.  But to have to break my path of travel can be disruptive. 

Steve D.	Thank you.

Kristin	Next we have Vidal, and then Rachelle, and then Eugene.  Vidal, go ahead.

Vidal	Okay.  Gene, I want to thank you for your comments.  You’ve always got good comments on all of these when we were part of the—or we are part of the ACC.  But your comments are appreciated.

	One of the things that I want to say about this, in my community we have those domes everywhere.  One of the big things for me is the perception of folks that don’t need the direction or the warning signals, they kind of look at those things like, oh, look what we’re doing for those that need them.  The more the better, I suppose is their thought.  Unless you need them, they’re really not doing anything, but they look good.  I mean, the beautiful yellow color and the domes they—in some perspective, I think we’re appeasing, or we’re kind of putting things out there that makes it look like the state are doing something for these folks, for us folks.  

	Now, I have peripheral blindness in both eyes, and I do use my cane when I’m out and about, and to me, I was trained with flow of traffic, I was trained with the cut of the curb cut, I was trained more about paying attention than using clues how to get around, besides the movement or traffic.  But one of the things that I want to say is there’s always folks that use them and folks that don’t use them.  But there’s just so many, and I’ll give you this quick example.   

	There’s a Walmart here in town in Fresno, and it’s almost like 60 yards across the front.  These domes are completely in front of that.  Now, obviously, if you’re in the store, you come out, it’s going to detect that there’s traffic, that you’re walking in to some kind of traffic.  Now, there’s a parking lot, so you say, well, okay, there’s a parking lot, so I’m going to walk in.  And if you’re alone and by yourself, you’re not going to cross those yellow truncated domes when they’re across an entire front of a building.  So I don’t know how you’re supposed to navigate to where you’re going.  It’s really a strange thing to see that many.

	And then the last thing, one of the things that I notice on the current codes is they talk about bus stops.  Now, bus stops is a place where I would like to see those, or have those, because buses are pulling in to a curb, and between the bus and you, and let’s say a bench, is there’s not a lot of safety zone there.  So that would be a safety thing to have those in front of every bus stop, because it would tell you that you’re too close to the curb when the bus is coming.  Or if your vision is such that you hear the bus, but you don’t want to approach the sound, and those domes gives you like a safety barrier.   That’s it.  Thank you. 

Rachelle	I think from a non-sight impaired person, maybe Kaylan can echo this, because I heard her say this as well.  I use them because I don’t use them.  If it’s on any sort of slope, I will jump off the curb, either into traffic, into a parking lot, to wholly avoid using them.  I love the idea of putting them in front of a bus stop in very specific areas, or if we’re putting them at a curb ramp, we’re putting them only on a flat surface, so that way it doesn’t provide any sort of mobility barrier for somebody that has a wheelchair.  

	I love Rosa and Gene’s perspective of having them in very limited places to provide a very specific signal, and then Vidal’s observation about Walmart, and Vidal is, I'm from Fresno too, in front of the Costco.  I mean, the zero curb lines are just insane because it’s the entire—and thankfully it’s flat, but I also see them on if there’s a really wide kind of drive aisle they’ll put them across the entire drive aisle.  So now I’m dealing with truncated domes on a ramp that’s probably not built to code in the first place.  So it just becomes hazardous for other people as well.  That’s all that I wanted to add.

Kristin	Thank you.  So Eugene next, and then Steve, and we’re in our final ten minutes of comments—oh, and then Chris as well.  

Susan	I think Michael put his hand up again as well.

Tim	Yes, so did Tim.

Kristin	So we’re going to continue with our comments another 10 minutes or so, 10, 15, hopefully everyone can get in before we start talking about our next steps.   So Eugene first.

Gene	Rosa brought up about the places where it says required for resiliency or sound of cane for contact, but by curb ramps it doesn’t.  That was a compromise when we were working the regulations.  Cities were saying, we don’t want to do that, and that was a long, hard fight, so we didn’t get that for standardization.  And that’s another thing as part of the certification process that we were doing, we were coming up with measurements for how much sound difference, and how much resiliency was required to be effective to spell that out.  That would be great to have the standardization on that. 

	The bus stop, when that was put in there, it was the idea of, preferably, that newer constructed ones would be a raised concrete path, meeting all the ADA requirements, with a sidewalk on either side, and there’d be a six-inch curb, so it would be raised six inches there.  The detectable warning was in places where they might just pour asphalt, fill in an area that, like in unincorporated areas where you just have ditches and everything, where you could pave just asphalt across there and put the truncated domes there where the blended transition to fulfill that hazardous vehicular way requirement.  So that was something to do with those retrofits, preferably the raised pad with the six-inch curb that meets all the specifications of a sidewalk, that is what is the most desirable thing to have, than having the detectable warnings on that.

	And the thing is, too, there is [indiscernible], and that is something that we were hoping with the product certification to deal with a slippery surface.  One of them where some people think [indiscernible], which are the most effective ones, [indiscernible] plastic and most visible, but they have fields of dots between them, extensive.  Well, the thing is, when that gets wet, it’s almost like a flat surface with nothing, those dots there.  I’m not talking about the domes, I’m talking about the little field dots, they give you traction there.  And that’s getting into design, and I know all the manufacturers where, when we met, were wanting some, basically, direction on what to do.  Of course, if it’s a concrete paver, it the texture [indiscernible].  And some of them were actually making concrete that made a sound difference, or actually have little hollow parts in there so that it would hold up, but it would make a sound.

Kristin	This is a good challenge that we have so much good information to share.  As we finish up our final few comments, a reminder we’re speaking again to how we’ve been trained to interact with detectable warnings, or sort of kind of generally what your experience has been.  So next we’ll go to Steve.

Steve	Hi, it’s Steve Twist.  We’ve been talking a lot about the usability of them, but I also wanted to bring up the constructability of them, and the code interpretation of the code enforcement officer. 

	Referring to Code Section 11B-705.1.2.2, where it says curb ramps and how they’re placed on curb ramps.  A perpendicular curb ramp with flared sides, the code says that you put the truncated domes six to eight inches back [indiscernible] the curb.  On a parallel curb ramp, it says to put them out—well, six to eight inches back of a curb, and then a parallel curb ramp to face the curb.  In other words, where the pan of the curb ramp meets the same as the concrete walkway and an asphalt accessible parking space, for example. 

	Well, the way the code reads there, you’re putting that truncated dome right at the edge of concrete, right up against asphalt.  That’s a real constructability issue.  Contractors hate it, and it’s not durable, it’s not a good way to build it.  So now, in order for them to satisfy me, because I’m going by the code, now they’re building these little concrete aprons outside there, which adds a whole other expense to forming it up and finishing it off and doing all that.  And it also puts a big argument between contractors and plan checkers, and stuff, about where those actually go.  

	Ida and I have actually had a conversation about that before, and it’s what the code says.  I’m saying, well, I don’t know what you do about it, if you want us to build a little apron there, then you have to do that.  But until that changes, I think that’s something that we also should bring in the discussions that the practicality and the placement of, not only the usability, but also the constructability of the whole thing.

Kristin	Thank you.  Next we’re going to hear from Chris, and then Tim, and then Mike.

Chris	[Indiscernible], in terms of the comments on [indiscernible] zoom back in on the question of how are we trained about this, how we learn about it, which is a really challenging thing.  It brings to mind a possible outcome of this would be a training module.  It’s something that I think there’s so much misunderstanding about.  There’s so many different reads, so many different interpretations, that training on this specific issue, it’s on one hand, a seemingly trivial minor issue, but it gets misinterpreted and misused, and I think largely because it’s not fully understood, therefore, sort of the lack of training about the clarity of the issues.

Kristin	Good, thank you.  Tim?

Tim	I think most of the issues that require training really do have to do with the concept of the hazardous vehicular area.  The general thought that was conveyed to me when I first learned about it was, it was a dividing line between the vehicular way and a pedestrian way, and it was to be placed on the pedestrian side and that will still warn a person about the dangers of a vehicle, but it was also not to prevent their mobility, or their being able to pass safely around that vehicular area.

	In practice, I see a lot of confusion on that issue, and people place them sometimes in such a way that’s a shorter amount of tactical warnings, but actually communicates that the person can’t walk safely in that direction, where, in reality, they can walk parallel to that direction safely.

	There’s been talk, the big box stores that have 180 feet of detectable warnings in front of them separating from the drive aisle or parking lot, but often, in my experience, it also is a pathway that a person can walk straight to a public sidewalk and go catch their bus, and they never had a car that brought them to that store.  So, there are other reasons, I think, why we have this, and maybe it’s not the best solution, but we are in a world where you’re seeing a lot more use of zero curbs.

	I think there’s some questions about whether we even need the word hazardous in the code that describes vehicular areas.  I think one of the things that’d be beneficial to this discussion is to add the definition for vehicular way, the definitions to present it on code sections, because I think it’s important, and it contributes to the discussion.  One of the reasons I say that is the definition for vehicular ways includes parking facilities.  So if I’m trying to separate parking facilities from pedestrian ways, to me it’s pretty clear that detectable warnings should never be placed in a parking facility, only at its border.

	These are kind of my thoughts on what it is.  I think we have a huge problem, in that it’s not being done consistently throughout the state, and if I were a person, I wouldn’t rely on their location, period, outside of maybe curb ramps, and someone gave a reason for not even that being true.  But I think for the hazard vehicular areas, it’s a non-reliable guide, or warning system, because of the way they’re currently installed so differently.  And those are my thoughts.

Kristin	Good.

Marsha	This is Marsha.

Kristin	Marsha, we’re going to hear from Mike first, and then we’d like your comments.

Mike	Go ahead, Marsha can talk.

Kristin	Thank you.

Marsha	With respect to hazardous vehicular way, I’m sure most of you know that the federal government gave up on that language a long time ago.  For one thing, you put the designer and the owner in a really difficult spot when you describe something as hazardous.  If the owner really does their job, and the designer does their job the way they should, the vehicular way should not be particularly hazardous for the pedestrian that also has to use it.

	Oftentimes what we found was people were saying, well, this is not a hazardous vehicular way, it’s a vehicular way, but it’s not hazardous.  But then people began to worry that if they didn’t describe their site as containing a hazardous vehicular way, that they would be, in some way, liable for any accidents that might occur because they failed to install the detectable warning.  

	I think it puts the designer in a no-win situation.  We ask him or her to define their design as hazardous, and if they fail to define their design as hazardous, we put them in a rather touchy legal situation.  I think it is best if we drop that kind of language, and better describe the specific vehicular intersections with pedestrian use that we want to provide warnings at, rather than add that kind of value judgment, or that kind of judgment to the scoping that really does get people in all kinds of trouble.

Debbie	I have a question too.  

Kristin	Yes, so, Debbie, go ahead. 

Debbie	I would like to know how sensitive is the touch of the end of a cane?  Is it something that you feel literally, or is it something that you’re listening to?  And how sensitive is it, as in, can you feel a slight elevation change, or the roughness of the surface material?

Kristin	Eugene?

Gene	Speaking for myself, the way I was trained to [audio disruption] cane was to, you swung the cane, you tap it to the left side, if you start your right foot with the head, and then you tap, then you raise and swung it to the other side of your body, and your left foot came out, and the idea was that tapping sound would produce something.

	But if I was in some area there was a lot of noise [indiscernible], I would have a [indiscernible] cane sliding across the—I would not raise it at all, so they’re on it.  And it makes a difference, too, what kind of cane tip you have.  I prefer a metal tip.  A lot of times people prefer some that are made of other material so that some way makes a little difference in what sounds you hear.  

	There are so many different kinds of canes, the difference, whether it’s a fiberglass or metal cane, and if it’s solid, if it isn’t.  There are a lot of variables on that, and that’s what the Product Certification Committee was looking at about that whole thing.

Debbie	So the material’s based on preference of the user?

Gene	Of the cane’s tip, and the type of cane you’re using, too, and the length of it and all that.

Debbie	Thank you.

Kristin	Rosa, was this about that question—so, Rosa, and then we’ll get to you, Mike.

Rosa	I guess to add to that, it also depends on the individual’s ability to feel, and their skills that, I think, as mentioned, different cane types.  I mean, there are some individuals who can actually feel the paint on the street bar in the middle of the street because of the cane type or their skill level.  Whereas other individuals may use a different type of cane, which is a roller tip, that maybe doesn’t have as much sensitivity, but at the same time—so yes, there’s sound, as well as texture that can be felt with a cane.

Kristin	Thank you.  So, Mike, we’re going to have your comment, and then if anybody else has a burning comment after that we’ll also take that.  Go ahead, Mike.

Mike	I’m okay.  Everybody said so much already, that’s okay.

Kristin	Do we have any final comments before we talk about next steps?  Good.  So, as you can see, there’s a lot for us to dive into over our coming sessions.  Sue had offered to give us a brief tutorial.  

Susan	You know what I think would probably work better is for people who want to learn how to use the box, Jessica and I can set that up and we can work with everybody one-on-one, and help you to navigate through it.  Does that work for you, Jessica?

Jessica	Yes.

Susan	Because otherwise now, I don’t know that we can open it up in our blackboard section, and other people can actually see what we’re doing.  So, yes, we’ll be willing to help anybody, because now we can send out an email with the links to where these documents are in the box, and then we can work with everybody so they can find where those documents are.

Rachelle	Is it just an email that you send out and you click on the link, it’s kind of like Dropbox?

Susan	Kind of, yes.

Ida	I do want to say that if anyone else prefers not to use this, that is fine, and we will work with you as well.  We could do both.  We could try it out if you want, and if it still doesn’t work for you let us know.

Susan	Yes, and then we can send you whatever document, if you want Word documents, or whatever, we can send it out to you that way as well.

Kristin	So what you will be seeing when you do go to box.com—or if you choose not to, the files will be sent to you another way—is that the architect team here will be uploading, I think it’s initial studies, is that correct?

Susan	Well, the way that we set it up right now, I think we have a folder that has everything from today’s meeting, and then, what we did, we also put together a folder that said case studies, and actually, Tim McCormick already sent in some suggestions.  He had some questions and some ideas, and then also he had code change proposals, and actually was kind of tweaking some of the language a little bit.  So we put that into the case studies folder.  So we have the case studies, today’s meeting, and I think we had one other folder.  

Kristin	And I think that leads us to our homework assignment, if we could call it that, as if we’re back in school, which is this request that everyone begin uploading photos.  So is there a folder for photographs?

Susan	Well, probably the best way to do that is if they want to email those—and what we said, you could either email in photographs, or you could, if you have plans that you want to share.  And the question is, obviously, if you’re going to send in a photograph, or even a plan, we would like to have a description that you provide with that as well.

	And, Rosa, do you think that it works best if somebody has a photograph?  And I ask this of Gene and Chris and Vidal, is it better that they use all text with the photograph, or if they provide a photograph and a caption, or a photograph and a Word document that goes with it, to describe what’s in the photograph or a plan?  And then if you want to send those to either myself or Jessica, then we can upload those documents.  That might make it easier for everybody.

Ida	Our discussion with the reason of bringing forth these ideas is that trying to bring forth a problematic installation, so that we can discuss and help develop our language, and just really realize, perhaps from practical users, where there might be an issue.  But we know that we then fully describe, so that everyone can understand what’s in the photograph, but then, can also relate, perhaps as [audio disruption] to try that they’ve had that experience as well.

Susan	And maybe they even have some good examples.

Ida	Exactly.

Susan	Yes, because that would be awfully nice to see, too.   This is Susan Moe.  If you have some good examples, that could help a lot as well.

Ida	I guess I’m asking for [indiscernible] colleagues here, what else do you need in setting up these scenarios for discussion?  Is there any accommodation we could make that you have a better idea of how to address discussing situations, photograph scenarios?

Rosa	So far it sounds good.  I mean, I think that as, maybe they uploaded some, like you said, having a picture along with a word description, or some type of caption, as much information to describe so that whatever type text that the person may be submitting also is available, an acceptable version.  My thought is that as we go through the group, we’ll learn more what’s being submitted to be able to address any concerns that come up.

Kristin	Yes, Eugene?

Gene	I agree with Rosa.  I’d like to try that.  I’d like to make, also, one other question, please.  I’d like a task force membership roster of who the people are, what their affiliations are, any contact information.  I understand it’s confidential, and it should be kept confidential within this group, but just to know who all the parties are there.

Susan	Gene, this is Susan Moe.  We put together a table, and it has the—what you would see is the person’s name, their affiliation, and then just an email address.  

Kristin	What we can add to that would be our leadership or representative names here, so [audio disruption] architect and the facilitator name as well, so we [audio disruption] everyone is.  That’s a good suggestion.  

	We’re going to hear from Chris and then Rosa.

Chris	Taking you back to the question about how to deal with the imagery, I think a lot of it’s going to come down to consistency, which might require some curation on the part of the DSA, in terms of consistency.  If each image is coming through in a different kind of strategy, it may or may not be evident.  
	But also in the information that’s provided, that if the useful information to actually describe the situation, sometimes the caption is not enough to really understand what the issue is and what’s good or bad about it, but enough to really understand, if you can’t see the image, what’s really the point of the issue.

Kristin	Good, thank you.  Rosa?

Rosa	It was a thought.  I mean, it would work for individuals in the room, but not those who are vision impaired and on the phone.  My thought was a way to bring kind of a tactile example of the photo, maybe like a raised form drawing kit, or something like that, as an option if there’s something that maybe we need to discuss.  I just wanted to share that as a possible option.    

	I mean, going through some of the language, right now I think some of the code language is really unclear.  So my thought was like, what does that look like, what does that translate into?  That might even be interesting to see if one person might interpret it a different way.

Kristin	Great.  I think the intention behind this assignment, as Ida had mentioned, is not just to see the problematic area examples, and also it’s working well, but really to get our whole task force on the same page, so that when we use a certain phrase, or speak to a different example, we all can actually kind of see or describe exactly what that looks like.  So I think that will be really helpful.

	Does anybody else—

Marsha	This is Marsha, I have a question.  Are we going to post any of the research data, or any—I mean, I’m assuming that the code change, any code change we propose has to be supportable by more than just our 14 opinions.  Are we going to be looking at the research that is available, or any background information?

Kristin	This is Kristin.  I’m seeing heads nod in our room, and I believe that we’ll—yes, and Ida wants to speak to that.

Ida	On the box, if you use the box, and if not, if you directly send, you have viewer uploader privileges.  That means anything you want to share that you feel is beneficial, you have the opportunity to upload to the box.  So the answer is yes, Marsha.  Whatever anyone has to share research-wise, that’s why we brought these brilliant minds in this room together, because we know we have the ability to tap into historical data, research, wealth or experience, photographs, and that it’s shareable. 

	I do also want to say that we are only suggesting to share emails because under DGS policy, we have to limit the amount of personal information we collect.  If you would like to share phone numbers, you would need to ask your colleague for that number directly, but it won’t be written down.  Email will be the preferred method of communication in that regard.

	We do also ask that when you receive that email, that you do not share anything that’s not relevant to this task force, and provide information that’s from other parties.  It must be relevant to this discussion and this task force, unless, of course, you’re throwing a fabulous party and we’re all invited.

Kristin	Can I ask a question for clarification?  I’d heard the word confidential mentioned earlier.  Can you share with us, if you’d like, how confidential shall we keep our discussions, and everything that’s happening during this process?

Ida	I think as a guiding force, you do have colleagues and you do want to receive information and get opinions.  I think it’s important that if you’re sharing that information with them, that it’s very clear that nothing that we discuss is defined.  I don’t want to get to the impression where, oh, they’re going to do this, because that is not determined, by any means.  This is a journey in discovery, in understanding, and in clarity, so that we can take that information and DSA will actually craft the regulation.  We are not crafting regulation.  This is informational.  

	While we do want you to tap into the knowledge base of the colleagues that you work with, because it will form the information as provided here, it is with the caveat that when you do that, that there’s an understanding that they don’t go away with the impression that we’re proceeding down any specific journey, any specific direction.  

	We will also ask that we not share the box link.  That is private to the 14 of us.  And that as DSA must control the information that gets disseminated to the public, only we do.  So when you provide it, it’s up to the box, it’s up to the box link or to us directly, and you do not share the link.

Susan	What we’ll do is, we’ll create another folder and inbox, where if it’s research documents, so we sort of keep things clean and in certain locations so we don’t start jumbling everything together.  But we’ll create another folder in there for research documents.

Kristin	Fantastic.  That’s very helpful.  Yes, and, Ida, one more.

Ida	It could be that when you start submitting your homework, if there [indiscernible] have the ability to be grouped in topics, like these are all curb ramps, these are all Costco parking lots, these are all—that might help in sorting the information, especially that we can categorize it and start to post it that way.  So we may move something that you put on the box, is what I’m trying to let you know.

	I know that that may be an issue, so we’ll have to see how that works.

Rachelle	The question then is for those who are unable to see the pictures.  Is it then, do you want a Word document?  Is it most helpful to have a one Word document for each photo, or is it, whereas, if I’m uploading three or four photos, and I do image one, image—I mean, how do we—just so that way you’re afforded whatever it is that you need to see each individual, or to understand each individual photo.

Kristin	Gene?

Gene	I need [audio disruption] for each of the pictures.

Ida	So is it helpful to say we are going to copy a picture on to a Word document and write the description below the Word document, so that the description stays with the picture?  Does that—

Gene	That helps.

Ida	That helps? 

Derek	And also, is it fair to say that each document should consist of one image and its associated description, rather than page after page after page of several different images and their description?

Debbie	Uniquely named so that everyone can refer to it. Image one, Image two.

Kristin	Gene, and then [audio disruption] we’ll get to you next.

Gene	Well, if there was like, let’s just say eight curb ramps and you’re taking pictures from different angles, then I could see it all being on one page and one description of it, but if it’s different programs, then it would be one picture with its own description.  That’s my personal preference.

Ida	This is Ida.  I’m going to suggest then that we, perhaps, write up these guidelines [audio disruption], and then we will also write up a file naming convention.  Because I don’t want you to have gone in to read something, and then we change the name of it, and then you can’t find it.  We will work on a file naming convention, and we will work on a folder structure, and we will work on guidelines on how to submit that information.

Derek	This is Derek again.  Because there may be studies that are submitted, or research, I think as Marsha indicated, it occurs to me that there may be portions of a research document that could be submitted, that our most pertinent to the discussion, and if there’s any way to identify those in some sort of a statement, like a cover letter, but necessarily a cover letter, but some sort of statement that would help the readers to zero in on which portion of those research documents are intended to be shared and discussed, that would be helpful.

	I’ve done a lot of research on detectable warnings over the years, and I’m certain that we’re going to be able to find dozens and dozens of research studies that have been conducted, as well as final reports on those studies.  So just helping the readers to zero in on the section of the document will be very helpful too.

Kristin	Good.  So we’ll put that in our guidelines.  And, Tim, we’d like to hear from you before you close.

Tim	I have no further comments.  I’m good.

Kristin	So our next meeting is going to be Wednesday, February 13th, 1:30 to 4:00, same location, and we’ll also have all of the blackboard collaborative information sent out.  You will be each receiving a summary with a lot of information in the coming week, in terms of how to upload photos, and all of that, so please do be on the lookout for that.

	Do we want to just look for a date to get things up if they want to be discussed at the next meeting?

Ida	When we send out [audio disruption] we can discuss it.  I don’t want to put a limitation on it now.  But be on the lookout, take your pictures.  Use the work plan reviewers, without naming the architecture of the project [audio disruption].

Susan	We’ll try to [audio disruption] brief information so we don’t send an email, and a couple days later another email.  So we’ll be kind of careful how we send out email information to you, so you won’t get multiple emails.

Kristin	Thank you, everybody, this will close our time.  Thank you.

Susan	Thank you, everybody, on the phone.

Moderator	Ladies and gentlemen, this will conclude our teleconference for today.  We thank you for using AT&T Executive TeleConference Service.  You may now disconnect.