WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:17.520 good morning like to call the what is it the June 5th no June 10th being of the civil service 00:00:17.520 --> 00:00:25.920 commission to order first order of business is to introduce guests and as we've done in 00:00:25.920 --> 00:00:30.600 the past and most of you've been here before you're the stars you're not the guest today 00:00:30.600 --> 00:00:40.760 so I see no one that's signed up to do public comments so we'll move on to the next order 00:00:40.760 --> 00:00:47.920 business which is to approve the minutes of the May 27th meeting commissioners you have 00:00:47.920 --> 00:01:00.520 those you've got those in your packets I move that we approve the minutes as presented any 00:01:00.520 --> 00:01:09.560 corrections comments 00:01:09.560 --> 00:01:24.840 seeing none all in favor of approval the minutes of the May 27th meeting say aye opposed alright 00:01:24.840 --> 00:01:30.720 next order of business is to take action on the eligibility list from the fire department 00:01:30.720 --> 00:01:43.160 driver promotional exams they have the information in your packets I would entertain a motion 00:01:43.160 --> 00:01:59.480 that we accept the eligibility list for the promotion not for the driver test so moved 00:01:59.480 --> 00:02:08.520 and seconded there any questions discussion hearing none all in favor of accepting the 00:02:08.520 --> 00:02:28.160 promotional lists say aye opposed next order of business is the appealed questions the 00:02:28.160 --> 00:02:35.320 agenda my agenda says that commissioners here was here was the question that I had earlier 00:02:35.320 --> 00:02:41.680 this morning and was cleared to me the the agenda says the captain's appeals and then 00:02:41.680 --> 00:02:49.120 the battalion chief appeals they were all presented to us in numerical order four of 00:02:49.120 --> 00:02:58.360 those questions four of those 20 questions were battalion chief questions the other 16 00:02:58.360 --> 00:03:04.040 were captain's questions but they were presented to us in numerical order so we've looked at 00:03:04.040 --> 00:03:13.560 all of them I would entertain a motion that we look at the since there's only four battalion 00:03:13.560 --> 00:03:19.800 chief questions I would entertain a motion that we hopefully can dispense of those battalion 00:03:19.800 --> 00:03:24.600 chief questions quickly so I would entertain a motion that we pull out the four battalion 00:03:24.600 --> 00:03:34.600 chief questions and tackle those first and then go to the captain's questions 00:03:34.600 --> 00:03:39.760 commissioner Prado I'm fine with that I don't mind so I can make a motion that we pull those 00:03:39.760 --> 00:03:50.640 four out and tackle those first I'll second that motion okay any discussion just FYI those 00:03:50.640 --> 00:04:10.640 questions are number 15 34 47 and 70 70 now that being done I have to catch up 00:04:10.640 --> 00:04:35.640 there and then I'll go to the captain's questions commissioner Prado I'm fine with that I don't 00:04:35.640 --> 00:04:45.560 mind I would say talk among yourselves but since you're not anywhere to talk to anybody 00:04:45.560 --> 00:05:13.160 don't talk to yourselves did you have them did you separate them there we go 34 all right 00:05:13.160 --> 00:05:20.080 sorry I didn't know if we were going to pass that or not so I didn't pull them out and 00:05:20.080 --> 00:05:28.080 look for them the other way all right so just a reminder to the appellants first thank you 00:05:28.080 --> 00:05:35.040 all for taking the time and the energy that it took you to study for the test to take 00:05:35.040 --> 00:05:43.720 the test and and now to have come back in and appeal your your the decisions and talk 00:05:43.720 --> 00:05:53.320 with it so we do appreciate that just as a reminder I want everyone to have a feeling 00:05:53.320 --> 00:06:01.480 that when when you quote walk out the door that you have had a chance to at least express 00:06:01.480 --> 00:06:12.560 your concerns your your appeal motion but on the other hand we don't need extra superfluous 00:06:12.560 --> 00:06:19.040 into information we certainly don't need repetitive information so that way we'll get out of here 00:06:19.040 --> 00:06:26.480 before next Tuesday so which I think you probably all appreciate so moving forward you've all 00:06:26.480 --> 00:06:31.360 done this before you'd all of these all look like familiar faces I've seen I've seen most 00:06:31.360 --> 00:06:41.960 of you before so first question is question 15 and that would be mr. Britain mr. Britain 00:06:41.960 --> 00:06:55.680 there you are I have to find you on my screen can you hear me now thank you all for for 00:06:55.680 --> 00:07:03.160 doing all this I know that this is a pretty high paying job for you guys but really don't 00:07:03.160 --> 00:07:08.280 have a whole lot to add other than I give them what I wrote other than you know usually 00:07:08.280 --> 00:07:13.640 you have a whole bunch of books on a study list that cover various subjects still related 00:07:13.640 --> 00:07:18.960 to the fire service the the difficult thing about this particular test was that three 00:07:18.960 --> 00:07:24.280 of the books were all over the same subject it was all fire service management at the 00:07:24.280 --> 00:07:32.440 executive level and even two of them had a different author at least one author for each 00:07:32.440 --> 00:07:39.040 chapter so that the chances for there be conflicting information was very high and I'm surprised 00:07:39.040 --> 00:07:45.400 there's not a greater number of appeals for us to cover but I just wanted to point that 00:07:45.400 --> 00:07:51.360 out and that's kind of where I was coming from that these books are very similar yet 00:07:51.360 --> 00:08:00.600 different people writing them with different opinions that's all I have okay questions 00:08:00.600 --> 00:08:16.880 of the appellant from the commissioners I don't really have a question I just wanted 00:08:16.880 --> 00:08:26.400 to is it possible to make a comment mr. chair yes depends on what the comment is but yes 00:08:26.400 --> 00:08:33.720 I just want once again I just want to salute all the the appellants for their their level 00:08:33.720 --> 00:08:41.840 of training and scholarship and the effort they put into this test as a commissioner 00:08:41.840 --> 00:08:48.200 I don't deal with this stuff every day and but I do my best to try and put myself in 00:08:48.200 --> 00:08:53.760 your shoes and also in the department shoes so when we make these decisions we're not 00:08:53.760 --> 00:09:01.760 doing it carelessly and we just wanted to acknowledge your scholarship and your hard 00:09:01.760 --> 00:09:07.360 work and we struggle with it probably not as much as you but we we struggle with it 00:09:07.360 --> 00:09:13.520 nonetheless and so I just wanted to to tip my hat to to all of you that that are under 00:09:13.520 --> 00:09:24.400 this process my question is about the question so when you guys are taking the test does 00:09:24.400 --> 00:09:30.320 it tell you what source you're supposed to be pulling information from or do you just 00:09:30.320 --> 00:09:38.080 it does from that it does to the specific question I believe it said something at the 00:09:38.080 --> 00:09:43.720 beginning of the test like these first 25 questions are come from this book and then 00:09:43.720 --> 00:09:47.720 whenever it changed the source material then you take it for ours for our test since it 00:09:47.720 --> 00:09:54.320 was forced books it was you know kind of a no-brainer is 25 25 between from each each 00:09:54.320 --> 00:10:02.440 source material but it's still like I put in my my appeal it's it's a pretty difficult 00:10:02.440 --> 00:10:07.360 it's difficult enough whenever you got books of they're covering different subjects like 00:10:07.360 --> 00:10:12.400 a rescue book or a safety book or a company officer book there's going to be some overlap 00:10:12.400 --> 00:10:18.120 there but but all three of these books were 100% overlap some of us some of the chapters 00:10:18.120 --> 00:10:23.200 even have the same title and they're just written by different people different leaders 00:10:23.200 --> 00:10:29.520 in the fire service one of them incidentally being uh being chief palsgrove was a contributing 00:10:29.520 --> 00:10:37.160 author but uh to one of the books but um the fire chief the fire chief handbook was one 00:10:37.160 --> 00:10:43.360 of the books y'all had to study for this test I'm sorry the fire chief's handbook was one 00:10:43.360 --> 00:10:48.120 of the books that you have to study first yes fire chief's handbook and then managing 00:10:48.120 --> 00:10:57.240 fire emergency services and then uh fire fire service management okay they're all the titles 00:10:57.240 --> 00:11:07.120 are even so similar it's hard to remember the okay any other comments for the for the 00:11:07.120 --> 00:11:18.080 appellant fire your response we vote to sustain the key based on the mutually agreed upon 00:11:18.080 --> 00:11:22.060 rules for the appeals this appeal is invalid since it states material out of a different 00:11:22.060 --> 00:11:30.560 book other than the book that the question was taken from 00:11:30.560 --> 00:11:31.840 commissioners questions of fire 00:11:31.840 --> 00:11:42.840 yeah I felt I feel really uncomfortable just like I did last time I really don't like that 00:11:42.840 --> 00:11:47.200 we're making people memorize one-liners from books and then holding them accountable for 00:11:47.200 --> 00:11:53.360 that um I especially I understand what the the fire department's saying about sustaining 00:11:53.360 --> 00:11:58.880 the key because it was taken from another book but if it's if if his answer if d is 00:11:58.880 --> 00:12:03.840 justified in another book that he actually had to study then I think we need to look 00:12:03.840 --> 00:12:09.280 at that I think we need to because it's not like he pulled it from some book that he was 00:12:09.280 --> 00:12:13.920 reading for pleasure and he's justifying it based on opinion it came directly from another 00:12:13.920 --> 00:12:21.820 book even though the title on the 25 questions here you know is like I don't understand how 00:12:21.820 --> 00:12:28.600 how we can hold people to that 00:12:28.600 --> 00:12:29.840 is that a question for me commissioner 00:12:29.840 --> 00:12:35.540 well it's a question and a comment so my I guess the question the comment part is how 00:12:35.540 --> 00:12:40.420 uncomfortable I feel with with with making people memorize one-liners and then justifying 00:12:40.420 --> 00:12:46.560 it that it's just not in the book that my second my question question is is d an appropriate 00:12:46.560 --> 00:12:49.360 answer if it was taken from the fire chief's handbook 00:12:49.360 --> 00:12:55.080 no because we asked for it specifically from the other book 00:12:55.080 --> 00:13:02.440 no that's not my question my question is is is d justify all the it's is it in the book 00:13:02.440 --> 00:13:08.960 is it in this other book whether you ask for it or not is d is d a good answer quoted from 00:13:08.960 --> 00:13:14.280 this book understand what you're asking commissioner but we asked that question of the information 00:13:14.280 --> 00:13:18.840 and the other book and that is the expectation of the fire department that you know the information 00:13:18.840 --> 00:13:19.840 from one book from another 00:13:19.840 --> 00:13:29.800 okay and why what's the justification behind that of knowing different answers from this 00:13:29.800 --> 00:13:33.640 for the same question from different source materials 00:13:33.640 --> 00:13:42.600 I think that the overall answer would be this if with any industry whether it be the fire 00:13:42.600 --> 00:13:49.800 service education whatever it is there is tons of information tons of authors all kinds 00:13:49.800 --> 00:13:55.520 of all relating to the same subject material and so I might need to know that this book 00:13:55.520 --> 00:14:00.200 over here says this and this book over here says this and I need to know the difference 00:14:00.200 --> 00:14:05.940 between the two 00:14:05.940 --> 00:14:12.440 because it's not one author says this may be true for them and another author says this 00:14:12.440 --> 00:14:18.840 may be true in that situation we've got to know the difference between the two 00:14:18.840 --> 00:14:22.840 not every book in education is going to say the same thing on the same topic correct 00:14:22.840 --> 00:14:30.560 I'm sure but I can justify my answer if I'm looking at theories or if I'm looking at development 00:14:30.560 --> 00:14:33.080 or pedagogy I could justify it and make an argument for the next 00:14:33.080 --> 00:14:34.080 sure 00:14:34.080 --> 00:14:39.160 commissioner I think that commissioner Prado this is this is basically I think what our 00:14:39.160 --> 00:14:46.160 next meeting that the part of our next meeting agenda that's already set is to make this 00:14:46.160 --> 00:14:53.000 discussion about exactly the discussion that you're asking there's been a long-standing 00:14:53.000 --> 00:14:59.640 discussion but we need to we need to talk about that again and that's what our agenda 00:14:59.640 --> 00:15:07.320 for the next meeting is along with approval of the lists so I but I do agree that the 00:15:07.320 --> 00:15:16.840 question needs the the fire need the fire needs to address the question of the content 00:15:16.840 --> 00:15:22.920 and the concepts not necessarily just because the same thing wasn't said and was said and 00:15:22.920 --> 00:15:28.360 another book if what was said in the other book is is valid in the question then I think 00:15:28.360 --> 00:15:33.760 we have an issue but but that's what this discussion is for our next agenda meeting 00:15:33.760 --> 00:15:42.960 and so if we'd be but we'll be bogged down forever today if we if we right now Davis 00:15:42.960 --> 00:15:52.280 they've studied for this test knowing that answer needs to come verbatim from the book 00:15:52.280 --> 00:16:00.000 that that's been designated so I think we probably need to move on 00:16:00.000 --> 00:16:10.560 I do have a question of officer is it Britain Britain yes sir Britain so when you were preparing 00:16:10.560 --> 00:16:19.400 for the test was it your understanding that you were going to be responsible for memorizing 00:16:19.400 --> 00:16:26.800 specific information was that your understanding rather than necessarily I hate to say this 00:16:26.800 --> 00:16:37.320 using your best judgment I wasn't yes and no I guess is I'd heard that and and I read 00:16:37.320 --> 00:16:42.840 through some of the rules but I've been a been a captain for 19 years and I haven't 00:16:42.840 --> 00:16:48.760 been taking these emotional exams for quite some time so I wasn't intimately familiar 00:16:48.760 --> 00:16:54.600 with what was going on and even even though I heard all this I still I still disagree 00:16:54.600 --> 00:16:59.960 with it I know in years past back whenever I was taking drivers test captain's test and 00:16:59.960 --> 00:17:05.760 promoting up there was a whole lot of questions you know like I said this is 20 years ago 00:17:05.760 --> 00:17:11.240 there's a lot of questions overturned back then just by quoting a book that wasn't on 00:17:11.240 --> 00:17:16.000 study material and I agree with that that should never be done but this is a book that 00:17:16.000 --> 00:17:21.640 I was I was charged with studying it was on the list and we're taught over and over and 00:17:21.640 --> 00:17:26.760 over and I've taught as a as a company officer over and over and over that you have as many 00:17:26.760 --> 00:17:31.400 tools in the toolbox as you can and then you use them it doesn't matter but doesn't matter 00:17:31.400 --> 00:17:35.480 if you know who it came from just matters that you know the tools and that you know 00:17:35.480 --> 00:17:40.440 you have a bunch of them to use from and you use them in the appropriate time and uh and 00:17:40.440 --> 00:17:46.920 that I knew one is why I kind of phrased the appeal the way I did because I knew that that 00:17:46.920 --> 00:17:51.640 was the expectation or I'd heard that that was the expectation but I just still wanted 00:17:51.640 --> 00:17:55.240 to appeal it because I disagree with with us being held to that standard I think it's 00:17:55.240 --> 00:18:00.560 counterproductive and that this whole process should be at some point about learning something 00:18:00.560 --> 00:18:15.880 and not just being able to memorize something thank you yes sir 00:18:15.880 --> 00:18:16.880 I'm ready mr chair 00:18:45.880 --> 00:19:13.480 we're having a discussion as to what the local rules actually say so everybody just hang 00:19:13.480 --> 00:19:23.800 tight for a second thank you so I wasn't ignoring you commissioner bains you you would 00:19:23.800 --> 00:19:38.440 never ignore me sir I know and while we're waiting I will officially congratulate you 00:19:38.440 --> 00:19:47.000 on your wedding anniversary last week oh thank you so much now it's in the public record 00:19:47.000 --> 00:20:12.240 and on television too 00:20:12.240 --> 00:20:41.360 thank you so much sir I'm so happy to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy to be here. 00:20:42.240 --> 00:21:00.720 Thank you so much. 00:21:00.720 --> 00:21:27.960 I'm so happy to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy to be here thank you so 00:21:27.960 --> 00:21:54.720 thank you so much sir I'm so happy to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy to 00:21:54.720 --> 00:22:15.120 be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy 00:22:15.120 --> 00:22:36.120 to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy 00:22:36.120 --> 00:22:57.680 to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy 00:22:57.680 --> 00:23:04.680 to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy 00:23:04.680 --> 00:23:15.080 to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy 00:23:15.080 --> 00:23:24.400 to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy 00:23:24.400 --> 00:23:33.520 to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy 00:23:33.520 --> 00:23:49.320 to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy 00:23:49.320 --> 00:24:00.720 to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy 00:24:00.720 --> 00:24:13.120 to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy 00:24:13.120 --> 00:24:27.360 to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy 00:24:27.360 --> 00:24:47.160 to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy 00:24:47.160 --> 00:24:55.960 to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy 00:24:55.960 --> 00:25:02.720 to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy 00:25:02.720 --> 00:25:14.640 to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy 00:25:14.640 --> 00:25:23.480 to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy 00:25:23.480 --> 00:25:30.320 to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy 00:25:30.320 --> 00:25:37.800 to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy 00:25:37.800 --> 00:25:49.320 to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy 00:25:49.320 --> 00:25:58.240 to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy 00:25:58.240 --> 00:26:08.360 to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy 00:26:08.360 --> 00:26:16.600 to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy 00:26:16.600 --> 00:26:26.920 to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy 00:26:26.920 --> 00:26:32.120 to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy 00:26:32.120 --> 00:26:37.680 to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy 00:26:37.680 --> 00:26:42.360 to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy 00:26:42.360 --> 00:26:48.760 to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy 00:26:48.760 --> 00:26:53.880 to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy 00:26:53.880 --> 00:27:03.520 to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy 00:27:03.520 --> 00:27:09.760 to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy 00:27:09.760 --> 00:27:14.360 really fast because I'm sure a lot of you would be like they were last time so we just 00:27:14.360 --> 00:27:19.080 have to be consistent if we're gonna go just with the with the quoted material and it has 00:27:19.080 --> 00:27:23.200 to be from the exact look that they said then let's just hold the key to all of them because 00:27:23.200 --> 00:27:28.440 that's not fair that on some of them someone has a more persuasive answer or justification 00:27:28.440 --> 00:27:34.440 you know and on some we don't I agree that's what I was sitting here thinking if we change 00:27:34.440 --> 00:27:40.420 things now that changes everything that the way we've looked at material for this appeal 00:27:40.420 --> 00:27:49.880 process for today it really kind of changes the whole the whole thing for right now so 00:27:49.880 --> 00:28:01.840 I and miss Lang's interpretation of it being from the actual book that's given in the in 00:28:01.840 --> 00:28:08.700 the test material should become for for at least for today's business that should be 00:28:08.700 --> 00:28:16.920 the rule that we use it has to come from the book not the list of quoted material just 00:28:16.920 --> 00:28:22.560 I mean I think again we if not we're gonna be here till the next meeting because I don't 00:28:22.560 --> 00:28:26.720 know how we get I don't know how we would answer this because it's an interpretation 00:28:26.720 --> 00:28:35.000 we need to we need to work on the language at least to suggest a language change perhaps 00:28:35.000 --> 00:28:42.360 perhaps need to do that but we need to do that at a later meeting not today all right 00:28:42.360 --> 00:28:48.000 we okay with that I'm okay with that okay I would entertain a motion on does anyone 00:28:48.000 --> 00:29:00.400 like to speak in opposition to the appeal jet where is he there he is hi Jeff unmute 00:29:00.400 --> 00:29:08.640 yourself hear me now yes sir I apologize you said in opposition to material I hit I raised 00:29:08.640 --> 00:29:14.880 my hand that time I just I'm not in the battalion chief when I'm in the captain's one but I 00:29:14.880 --> 00:29:21.000 did set through the entire driver appeals I just wanted to comment you're making a departure 00:29:21.000 --> 00:29:27.620 from what you've established when you make this rule today that you're basically saying 00:29:27.620 --> 00:29:32.480 one source materials more authoritative than the other simply because that question came 00:29:32.480 --> 00:29:37.620 from that book and I think you have to look at it as all source material in the broader 00:29:37.620 --> 00:29:45.800 sense because as one of the commissioners stated your all of these quote something off 00:29:45.800 --> 00:29:50.080 another page other than where the answer come from most of these appeals we're going to 00:29:50.080 --> 00:29:56.960 handcuff ourselves and I don't I believe they're all equally authoritative not one over the 00:29:56.960 --> 00:30:01.120 other just because that's where the question came from I think that's where we wind up 00:30:01.120 --> 00:30:07.200 whenever we bring that scope down to just that one page just that one sentence possibly 00:30:07.200 --> 00:30:11.360 on an appeal and we're going to run head on into that today because I've already seen 00:30:11.360 --> 00:30:21.680 somebody accept you the answers I just want to throw that out there okay I appreciate 00:30:21.680 --> 00:30:25.600 that Jeff but that's not a rule that we're making today we actually don't like that rule 00:30:25.600 --> 00:30:29.560 we want to change that rule what I'm saying is that if it's actually written and it is 00:30:29.560 --> 00:30:34.640 already a rule we can't change it in the middle of the fields I agree with everything you're 00:30:34.640 --> 00:30:39.480 saying and so just like we're gonna have to hold the key because that's the rule then 00:30:39.480 --> 00:30:42.400 I mean the fire department's gonna have to do the same because I know that at the last 00:30:42.400 --> 00:30:46.920 meeting there was maybe one or two that we we got persuaded and we switched and you know 00:30:46.920 --> 00:30:51.280 the other ones we did it and so I just want to be consistent and fair for everyone and 00:30:51.280 --> 00:30:56.560 then once we meet next month then we do need to change this we need and we need y'all's 00:30:56.560 --> 00:31:04.520 input because I don't think it's good I mean even in even in masters program you know the 00:31:04.520 --> 00:31:10.280 tests are comprehensive they're cumulative you know it's not just from this one book 00:31:10.280 --> 00:31:16.360 so we need to look at that definitely absolutely that's an argument I've been making for what 00:31:16.360 --> 00:31:24.040 15 years now so we need to discuss that so thank you Jeff for your for your comments 00:31:24.040 --> 00:31:31.000 yes sir I would entertain if no one likes what wants to speak yes just one more thing 00:31:31.000 --> 00:31:43.880 that I just noticed it looks like there was in the fire meeting confer agreement and subsequently 00:31:43.880 --> 00:31:51.960 there after that was approved on September 24th 2019 there was a section that state that 00:31:51.960 --> 00:31:56.760 stated that appeals to the commission under section 143.03 for the Texas local government 00:31:56.760 --> 00:32:02.880 code should be limited to the quoted source material attribute attributable to the reference 00:32:02.880 --> 00:32:10.280 examination question so it looks like in the recent meeting confer agreement that was looked 00:32:10.280 --> 00:32:19.160 at and decided upon so I do have revisions pending right now with the our local rules 00:32:19.160 --> 00:32:24.120 that has that particular language in there based on the approved meeting confer agreement 00:32:24.120 --> 00:32:38.280 on September 24th of 2019 so I think that resolves the question that you all had limited 00:32:38.280 --> 00:32:44.880 to the quoted reference material yeah attributable to the examination the reference examination 00:32:44.880 --> 00:33:00.560 question attributable reference yes and that's 143.0.034 that's what they reference in in 00:33:00.560 --> 00:33:07.920 regard to the Texas local government code thank you though you're welcome just to clarify 00:33:07.920 --> 00:33:13.800 that was an agreement that came upon with the union and the departmental meeting together 00:33:13.800 --> 00:33:21.920 and coming to that conclusion and writing that into that contract and miss Lang that 00:33:21.920 --> 00:33:29.920 came from the meet and confer yes agreement yes that was approved by council on September 00:33:29.920 --> 00:33:36.320 24th of 2019 which basically just clarified for the commissioners you may already know 00:33:36.320 --> 00:33:43.440 this and I apologize if you do we have no we have nothing to do with that right we are 00:33:43.440 --> 00:33:51.520 not involved in that process at all so they made that decision for us but we have to abide 00:33:51.520 --> 00:33:57.360 by that decision we have to abide by it but we don't we had no no yeah we have no say 00:33:57.360 --> 00:34:08.260 in that in that meeting confer process right right all right anyone anyone like to speak 00:34:08.260 --> 00:34:20.320 in opposition I would entertain a motion on question 15 I move that we sustain the the 00:34:20.320 --> 00:34:36.520 code sustain the key excuse me I'll second that discussion I understand what y'all just 00:34:36.520 --> 00:34:42.920 wrote on that on that meet and confer but then I really don't see what the need is for 00:34:42.920 --> 00:34:50.320 us to review questions the department can just hold the key but I don't need I don't 00:34:50.320 --> 00:34:55.240 understand the need for a commission to look at each question if we're just supposed to 00:34:55.240 --> 00:35:01.560 hold the key from the quoted source material but that's my own reservation and based on 00:35:01.560 --> 00:35:12.720 how the rules are I mean I'm fine with that but I don't agree all in favor of the motion 00:35:12.720 --> 00:35:35.640 say aye aye opposed all right motion passes two to one two to two to zero with an abstention 00:35:35.640 --> 00:35:51.880 sorry said that wrong question 34 34 Mr. Hornback see him here am I missing him okay question 00:35:51.880 --> 00:35:59.880 for 34 is the taken from the fire chief's handbook chief fire chief firefighters job 00:35:59.880 --> 00:36:06.800 description has changed significantly specifically since the 1960s with the fire service capacity 00:36:06.800 --> 00:36:12.720 for rapid emergency response functions have expanded to include all the following except 00:36:12.720 --> 00:36:17.440 fire suppression emergency medical service hazardous materials response technical rescue 00:36:17.440 --> 00:36:24.680 high angle trench structural collapse dive team swift water rescue the keyed answer is 00:36:24.680 --> 00:36:32.800 a fire suppression the appeal says that the question is faulty there's no correct answer 00:36:32.800 --> 00:36:37.760 question implies that fire service functions based on the keyed answer no longer includes 00:36:37.760 --> 00:36:43.240 fire suppression fire suppression is still a primary function even with expanded function 00:36:43.240 --> 00:36:49.380 fire suppression is still included functions have expanded to include answers bc and d 00:36:49.380 --> 00:36:58.560 but also includes fire suppression there are no correct answers to this question since 00:36:58.560 --> 00:37:07.800 I'm reading it and we have no appellant fire response sustain the key fire suppression 00:37:07.800 --> 00:37:12.000 has always been part of the fire service therefore the fire suppression is the exception in the 00:37:12.000 --> 00:37:17.120 list of answers given all other answers have been incorporated since 1960 as listed on 00:37:17.120 --> 00:37:29.840 page 396 commissioners question of fire I had difficulty with this question I felt it 00:37:29.840 --> 00:37:42.880 was it was not worded properly it was confusing hey this is what this is what I mean so it 00:37:42.880 --> 00:37:49.520 says logically we're not asking them to use logically we're asking them to quote the book 00:37:49.520 --> 00:37:59.640 so on page 396 I'm not seeing fire suppression on here am I am I looking in the wrong spot 00:37:59.640 --> 00:38:05.840 I didn't see it either so then we can't say logically because Mr. Britton would have logically 00:38:05.840 --> 00:38:11.200 assumed that the other question from the other book so we can't go back and forth so if it's 00:38:11.200 --> 00:38:17.680 not on the page then I don't sustain the key well what I'm sorry ma'am I thought that was 00:38:17.680 --> 00:38:25.240 a question for me sir go ahead go ahead if I was just going to say that if it's not there 00:38:25.240 --> 00:38:29.960 the question is asking for the exception on the list and therefore the fact that it's 00:38:29.960 --> 00:38:39.120 not there it is the exception but your justification you're saying fire suppression has always been 00:38:39.120 --> 00:38:47.320 part of the let me go back and reread this question but it hasn't changed significantly 00:38:47.320 --> 00:39:03.680 that's the I think I read it about five or six or so times and I was still confused so 00:39:03.680 --> 00:39:09.760 it was it was difficult fire suppression has always been part of the fire service therefore 00:39:09.760 --> 00:39:27.360 fire suppression is the exception in the list of answers given 00:39:27.360 --> 00:39:33.520 that's worded way different so the it is part but because it's not on the list it's the 00:39:33.520 --> 00:39:39.680 when it's the exception because it's logical because it's always been there it hasn't 00:39:39.680 --> 00:39:46.480 changed since the 1960s I don't disagree with your with your assessment of the question 00:39:46.480 --> 00:39:53.120 but that's the that's I think that's the fire logic is that it's not there because it hasn't 00:39:53.120 --> 00:39:58.680 changed it's the exception because it hasn't changed since the 60s all these other things 00:39:58.680 --> 00:40:05.840 have come in since the 60s I'm sadly enough I can remember the 60s and we didn't have 00:40:05.840 --> 00:40:17.760 EMS that much or has met or in the or any of the others so that's the logic I think 00:40:17.760 --> 00:40:25.040 I think we need to send fire a question that it's not a good question Chief Skipper are 00:40:25.040 --> 00:40:47.600 we getting that it's not a good question but I understand where they're coming from 00:40:47.600 --> 00:41:05.080 further discussion so Commissioner Prado are you okay with sustaining the key functions 00:41:05.080 --> 00:41:16.520 have expanded to include all following except yeah because what you guys are saying is logically 00:41:16.520 --> 00:41:21.480 it would be included because it always has been that just hasn't been updated because 00:41:21.480 --> 00:41:28.400 it always has been is that my understanding that right I'm curious to see what if anyone 00:41:28.400 --> 00:41:37.680 is speaking for or against the appeal of any other appellants I was that was my that was 00:41:37.680 --> 00:41:49.400 where I was going next but anyone like to speak in opposition to the appeal 00:41:49.400 --> 00:42:01.400 seeing hearing no one that we have anyone okay I make the motion that we sustain the 00:42:01.400 --> 00:42:08.360 key with the understanding this is not a good question I realize that's a that's a compound 00:42:08.360 --> 00:42:21.120 that's a compound statement but nonetheless that's how I feel I'll second it any further 00:42:21.120 --> 00:42:26.440 discussion I think these are important so whenever people appeal I think it's really 00:42:26.440 --> 00:42:30.760 important that they show up because if this person was here I mean I think we could make 00:42:30.760 --> 00:42:35.160 a really good argument to throw out the question but since Melon's here to speak on behalf 00:42:35.160 --> 00:42:47.840 of the question then I mean I guess I'm forced to sustain the key as well 00:42:47.840 --> 00:42:55.200 just FYI throwing out the question is not an option yes based on the the recent meeting 00:42:55.200 --> 00:43:00.720 confer agreement throwing out the question is not an option we could accept all the answers 00:43:00.720 --> 00:43:09.200 and give everybody but we can't throw the question now so where are we motion is to 00:43:09.200 --> 00:43:21.840 sustain the key all in favor say aye opposed hearing none and we thought this was going 00:43:21.840 --> 00:43:34.800 to go quickly next is question 47 mr. Boozer I saw you somewhere you keep jumping there 00:43:34.800 --> 00:43:41.160 you are keep jumping around on my screen and it's not your fault it's a zoom zoom problem 00:43:41.160 --> 00:43:51.800 so all righty question 47 the morning I'll try to keep this quick and short I based my 00:43:51.800 --> 00:43:57.240 if you'll hope you guys have the test question in front of you but along with the answers 00:43:57.240 --> 00:44:03.800 if you'll look at the answers to that test question it really has no bearing on the content 00:44:03.800 --> 00:44:12.020 of the material to try to remember whether something is most likely likely unlikely or 00:44:12.020 --> 00:44:19.240 somewhat likely as a test question answer to me doesn't really have any bearing on the 00:44:19.240 --> 00:44:29.480 knowledge content that I was required to remember you know I don't know anything else other 00:44:29.480 --> 00:44:37.200 than what my statement on on my appeal was to try to convince you that I just I feel 00:44:37.200 --> 00:44:42.440 like that to have an expectation that I'm supposed to remember whether something is 00:44:42.440 --> 00:44:58.880 more likely most likely unlikely or somewhat likely is a little bit much okay questions 00:44:58.880 --> 00:45:13.360 of the appellant and the justification from the department says the magic words direct 00:45:13.360 --> 00:45:19.560 wording from the books so there's not much discussion for that okay well you jumped 00:45:19.560 --> 00:45:26.720 the gun a little bit but that's all right um five response is direct wording from the 00:45:26.720 --> 00:45:33.200 book we vote to sustain the key and I can read the rest of this if you like answer b 00:45:33.200 --> 00:45:37.160 and first most firefighters will encounter the unexpected at some time in their career 00:45:37.160 --> 00:45:46.560 answers a and d places doubt whether it will ever happen or not 00:45:46.560 --> 00:45:55.600 question of fire I have no questions of fire anyone like to speak in opposition to the 00:45:55.600 --> 00:46:00.960 appeal I'm sorry Lillian did you have okay anyone like to speak in opposition to the 00:46:00.960 --> 00:46:13.560 appeal I would entertain a motion on question 30 those question 47 this is say that again 00:46:13.560 --> 00:46:20.560 John you broke up I'm sorry I moved to sustain the key okay sorry about that when your fault 00:46:20.560 --> 00:46:41.380 is there a second I'll second it just for just for discussion discussion I have no discussion 00:46:41.380 --> 00:46:53.880 all in favor of sustaining the key to 47 say aye aye by the way Mr. Boozer the only thing 00:46:53.880 --> 00:47:02.500 I would say to answer your to your concern besides the techniques of the question itself 00:47:02.500 --> 00:47:08.480 is that that sometimes gives you some opportunity to plan if you know that that it's very likely 00:47:08.480 --> 00:47:13.160 that you're going to run into something you plan accordingly that would be the only thing 00:47:13.160 --> 00:47:18.720 that when I dug through this I can make came up with that myself it's just a planning thing 00:47:18.720 --> 00:47:24.400 in your own mind to be ready for it so but or or go talk to your union and tell them 00:47:24.400 --> 00:47:31.760 that you want those rules change in the meeting confer because I honestly I'm feeling a little 00:47:31.760 --> 00:47:38.380 frustrated and I feel a little useless because I'm not I'm being asked to do the exact thing 00:47:38.380 --> 00:47:43.360 that you guys are asked to do is to memorize and to not think and so on all of these appeals 00:47:43.360 --> 00:47:46.880 I'm being asked just to sustain the key because those are what the rules are and we have to 00:47:46.880 --> 00:47:51.440 do that but I'm not using my brain I'm just agreeing with what's already been stated and 00:47:51.440 --> 00:47:55.640 so what I would say is if enough of you would go and talk to you tell them you want about 00:47:55.640 --> 00:48:08.280 you want that changed okay question 70 mr. Boozer you're back on again you haven't moved 00:48:08.280 --> 00:48:23.080 this time you're right there thank you I can't really other than you know the fact that you 00:48:23.080 --> 00:48:28.360 yourself chairman Ramsey said that the source material should be quoted verbatim from the 00:48:28.360 --> 00:48:37.560 book to simply ask a question that entails all of the following except and to change 00:48:37.560 --> 00:48:45.240 a single word in the correct answer validate invalidates the test question in my opinion 00:48:45.240 --> 00:49:00.320 because the answer is not verbatim from the book 00:49:00.320 --> 00:49:10.440 questions of the appellant I have no questions of the appellant 00:49:10.440 --> 00:49:16.080 I'm gonna I don't really have a question mr. Boozer I do have a comment though when you're 00:49:16.080 --> 00:49:24.040 writing a test sometimes you have to mean the idea of changing something is what gives 00:49:24.040 --> 00:49:30.560 it a test question and gives it that except answer I mean there are there would be no 00:49:30.560 --> 00:49:37.440 question to be asked if there were if it all was exactly like it came from the book that's 00:49:37.440 --> 00:49:44.080 where you you find that's where you find the finite differences to make the exceptions 00:49:44.080 --> 00:49:50.900 now I mean that's a that's a test question testing phenomenon not I agree with you that 00:49:50.900 --> 00:49:55.040 it's not in the book but the reason it's not in the book is that that's what was changed 00:49:55.040 --> 00:49:59.400 in order to make the question out of it so I don't know if that makes any sense or not 00:49:59.400 --> 00:50:06.440 but you you have to change something in order to get a question and that's the the discrimination 00:50:06.440 --> 00:50:16.760 that needs to be made so all right fire but to sustain the key all the answers are taken 00:50:16.760 --> 00:50:22.480 directly from the text and yes the word no was taken out of the answer on a to make it 00:50:22.480 --> 00:50:37.320 a false statement questions of fire hearing none anyone like to speak in opposition to 00:50:37.320 --> 00:50:50.880 the appeal seeing no one all in favor the motion is to sustain the key on question 70 00:50:50.880 --> 00:51:02.620 all in favor say aye aye sorry I thought mr. Baines did did you make a motion I did not 00:51:02.620 --> 00:51:08.360 make a motion oh I'm sorry okay and what we did we get the motion so I make a motion that 00:51:08.360 --> 00:51:14.680 we sustain I apologize I thought we I thought that was I just heard that in my head so all 00:51:14.680 --> 00:51:29.560 right their second all in favor say in discussion no discussion all in favor say aye aye opposed 00:51:29.560 --> 00:51:42.160 okay those are the four battalion chief questions so we can dismiss them again before before 00:51:42.160 --> 00:51:51.560 you guys go guy where I'll say this again for the captain so so don't listen but I do 00:51:51.560 --> 00:51:58.600 appreciate the time that you put in the effort that you put in to do the study to try to 00:51:58.600 --> 00:52:06.240 make yourself better to make us better and so it is more appreciated than you probably 00:52:06.240 --> 00:52:14.320 feel that feel right now but it truly is appreciated and thank you for doing what you do for us 00:52:14.320 --> 00:52:24.920 so thank you all right next order of business on the agenda is to address the captain's 00:52:24.920 --> 00:52:54.080 appeals so back to the beginning here with mr. Roselle okay oh okay unmute yourself 00:52:54.080 --> 00:53:03.160 there you are I'm sitting here with Greg Johnson so I just put both of our names up okay if 00:53:03.160 --> 00:53:10.440 that helps I appreciate you guys' time thank you so much I know this is a tough job for 00:53:10.440 --> 00:53:19.840 you guys my question involves the definition of standards is there any way I can have the 00:53:19.840 --> 00:53:27.320 question read we don't have the questions on our end sure question one says blank serve 00:53:27.320 --> 00:53:36.180 to regulate an approach system or topic for which they are written blank serve to regulate 00:53:36.180 --> 00:53:45.280 an approach system or topic for which they are written the answers are codes guides regulations 00:53:45.280 --> 00:54:01.120 and standards codes guides regulations standards the key dancer is a yeah thank you I appreciate 00:54:01.120 --> 00:54:06.400 that my appeal has to do excuse me with the the definition of standard and how similar 00:54:06.400 --> 00:54:15.880 it is to the definition of code just from the the book the definition of standard actually 00:54:15.880 --> 00:54:22.600 includes more than was in the test answer to include standards to have the effect of 00:54:22.600 --> 00:54:27.240 law a standard must be adopted by an authority with the legal responsibility to enact the 00:54:27.240 --> 00:54:33.240 standard is law the definition of definition of code is a work of law established or adopted 00:54:33.240 --> 00:54:43.120 by rulemaking authority so my argument is if and when a authority establishes a standard 00:54:43.120 --> 00:55:02.900 it becomes a code and at that point the two terms are interchangeable and it becomes semantics 00:55:02.900 --> 00:55:18.800 questions of the appellant I have a question of fire fire responses are there any questions 00:55:18.800 --> 00:55:27.640 to for the appellant okay now fire response but to sustain the key this is a verbatim 00:55:27.640 --> 00:55:31.680 definition in the book three out of the four answers codes regulations and standards are 00:55:31.680 --> 00:55:36.040 interrelated yet very different this is why it is important to know the differences the 00:55:36.040 --> 00:55:41.120 keyed answer is the definition of codes in the book specifically a code is a regulatory 00:55:41.120 --> 00:55:54.800 approach while standard is more of a measurement my question fire my question of fire is this 00:55:54.800 --> 00:56:03.600 you know it has to be a reason you want them to make this distinction and could you elaborate 00:56:03.600 --> 00:56:12.560 on that reason why you want them to make this distinction I mean you asked me if you asked 00:56:12.560 --> 00:56:18.560 me to learn this I'm learning it for a reason so could you elaborate a little bit on why 00:56:18.560 --> 00:56:25.120 you want them to to have this kind of distinction standards and codes are very close but they 00:56:25.120 --> 00:56:31.640 are different words so they are different words so a code once it becomes law is law 00:56:31.640 --> 00:56:35.920 a standard may be something that we use to measure how well we're doing but it's not 00:56:35.920 --> 00:56:44.200 necessarily a law one could put me a live lively on a civil in a civil way and one could 00:56:44.200 --> 00:56:51.560 put me lively in a more criminal way so codes are law and standards are something that we 00:56:51.560 --> 00:56:56.720 should strive for and to meet but not necessarily hold the weight of law and we should know 00:56:56.720 --> 00:57:12.800 the difference between those two things thank you other questions of fire 00:57:12.800 --> 00:57:24.040 would like to speak in opposition to the appeal I would entertain a motion on question one 00:57:24.040 --> 00:57:49.400 I move that we sustain the code a key the code the key it's all right second discussion 00:57:49.400 --> 00:58:14.600 all in favor say aye opposed passes to sustain the key you changed on me next Mr. Johnson 00:58:14.600 --> 00:58:23.880 your turn question three good morning guys again for being here like everybody else mentioned 00:58:23.880 --> 00:58:28.280 like Mr. Roselle said can I have you guys read the question for me one more time since 00:58:28.280 --> 00:58:38.080 we don't have it on our end sure hang on just one second so you've seen it before we hadn't 00:58:38.080 --> 00:58:43.920 so but I do have it I'm just giving you our time there so finding the book page the reference 00:58:43.920 --> 00:58:52.080 all right the question says with regard to environmental integrity blank is the ISOs foundation 00:58:52.080 --> 00:59:00.400 for making effective judgments on environmental integrity the answers are judging let me read 00:59:00.400 --> 00:59:07.700 it again with regard to environmental integrity blank is the ISOs foundation for making effective 00:59:07.700 --> 00:59:17.040 judgments on environmental integrity a judging the rate of change B defining physical surroundings 00:59:17.040 --> 00:59:28.120 C recognizing resource needs D determining rescue profile the keyed answer is a judging 00:59:28.120 --> 00:59:38.840 the rate of change okay thank you for that I appreciate it so as I wrote in my appeal 00:59:38.840 --> 00:59:45.640 the book does talk about judging the rate of change but my pill stems from to judge 00:59:45.640 --> 00:59:50.040 the rate of change in something you have to know what that something is you can't judge 00:59:50.040 --> 00:59:55.520 the rate of change in something you're not you're not trying to figure out what that 00:59:55.520 --> 01:00:02.640 change is going to be in so I based my appeal off the fact that page 177 it says environmental 01:00:02.640 --> 01:00:08.680 integrity can be defined as the status of the building conditions and hazards in terms 01:00:08.680 --> 01:00:18.680 of stability which is change potential and time rate of change so determining the hazards 01:00:18.680 --> 01:00:23.440 in terms of stability those would be all those physical surroundings that you're trying to 01:00:23.440 --> 01:00:30.560 determine if they're changing or not also on page 195 it says recall that the passage 01:00:30.560 --> 01:00:36.720 of time is a factor when judging integrity not the factor it's a factor the integrity 01:00:36.720 --> 01:00:44.480 listed is referring to environmental integrity both of these passages where I pulled from 01:00:44.480 --> 01:00:49.840 in the quoted source material are talking about environmental integrity so the words 01:00:49.840 --> 01:00:56.920 and an a in these two passages that I brought up indicate there are multiple factors to 01:00:56.920 --> 01:01:01.440 consider concerning the environmental integrity and the other one out of the answer choice 01:01:01.440 --> 01:01:07.240 is that it specifically talks about is the physical surroundings on page 195 talking 01:01:07.240 --> 01:01:13.200 about environmental integrity involves a consideration of factors such as weather smoke flame spread 01:01:13.200 --> 01:01:17.960 and hazardous energy all of those things are your physical surroundings and you have to 01:01:17.960 --> 01:01:23.100 know what those things are to then be able to judge the rate of change in them that's 01:01:23.100 --> 01:01:43.280 where I come from on this appeal okay questions of the appellant 01:01:43.280 --> 01:01:51.080 none fire response I did have a question excuse me okay I'm sorry a little slow and your name 01:01:51.080 --> 01:02:00.200 again sir is mr. Johnson Greg Johnson okay mr. Johnson thank you very much so in your 01:02:00.200 --> 01:02:06.440 preparation for this examination was it your understanding that you had specific answers 01:02:06.440 --> 01:02:13.000 that needed to be looked for and then given was that your understanding 01:02:13.000 --> 01:02:18.240 the understanding that I had of any promotional test I've ever taken is that the source material 01:02:18.240 --> 01:02:22.600 that we're given we need to be able to quote anything up to and including the copyright 01:02:22.600 --> 01:02:28.240 date on that material so we can be tested out of anything it doesn't give specific page 01:02:28.240 --> 01:02:34.840 ranges it doesn't give anything other than just a book we're supposed to read so yes 01:02:34.840 --> 01:02:39.000 we're supposed to know the material but it's not defined to one section in the book if 01:02:39.000 --> 01:02:44.160 it's out of the same source material we should be able to go through the book and pull multiple 01:02:44.160 --> 01:02:51.440 references to make our decision and then let me let me let me ask a leading question this 01:02:51.440 --> 01:02:58.400 may not be very popular but eventually you know the department has to set a standard 01:02:58.400 --> 01:03:05.440 would you not agree that's correct okay and so apparently there's been a standard set 01:03:05.440 --> 01:03:11.840 that says this is what we're looking for and and your answer was not necessarily what they 01:03:11.840 --> 01:03:19.600 were looking for so I guess my thing I'm trying to say is that while I would love to give 01:03:19.600 --> 01:03:25.560 everybody the benefit of the doubt the department has something specifically they're looking 01:03:25.560 --> 01:03:30.320 for and that's one of the responsibilities of the department is to define things and 01:03:30.320 --> 01:03:36.240 apparently your answer did not match what they were looking for it wasn't a bad answer 01:03:36.240 --> 01:03:40.480 I mean it was a very very good answer and a well presented answer but not necessarily 01:03:40.480 --> 01:03:48.980 what the department was looking for I understand what you're saying but the the I pulled it 01:03:48.980 --> 01:03:52.980 out of the same source material that they're asking for and it's under the same heading 01:03:52.980 --> 01:04:00.760 and just on a different page number so it's all talking about the same thing so that's 01:04:00.760 --> 01:04:04.400 what I that that's kind of going back to if we're if we're wanting the department to say 01:04:04.400 --> 01:04:10.080 we're just supposed to remember a set line we need to make sure that other sections in 01:04:10.080 --> 01:04:15.360 the same quoted material don't have additional information to add that then could change 01:04:15.360 --> 01:04:24.720 the answer based on that one line in another section thank you Mr. Johnson I have a I have 01:04:24.720 --> 01:04:32.680 a question I have a scenario that I want to put to you we get we're getting we are indeed 01:04:32.680 --> 01:04:38.640 getting tied up in the book and but here's here's my question it's my scenario to you 01:04:38.640 --> 01:04:45.240 I don't know if you were out last night around seven o'clock or so but if you had been out 01:04:45.240 --> 01:04:52.440 fighting a fire last night around seven o'clock there was a nice gentle breeze blowing it 01:04:52.440 --> 01:04:58.960 was made it a fairly nice night because the front was coming through and about seven thirty 01:04:58.960 --> 01:05:07.100 quarter of eight if you were still out fighting a fire there came a time period where the 01:05:07.100 --> 01:05:13.560 winds must have gone to thirty thirty five miles an hour if you had been fighting that 01:05:13.560 --> 01:05:22.000 fire it isn't just defining the physical surroundings it's judging the rate of change was a gentle 01:05:22.000 --> 01:05:28.040 breeze at seven o'clock by eight o'clock it was a roaring torrent of wind and you would 01:05:28.040 --> 01:05:34.660 have had to have made a change and made that made a decision based on the the rate of change 01:05:34.660 --> 01:05:40.120 not just that oh it's windy so that's where I when I read through this that's where I 01:05:40.120 --> 01:05:46.480 came from and last night was just another example of it but the idea I mean what you're 01:05:46.480 --> 01:05:52.000 saying the physical surroundings are a part of the rate of change you measure something 01:05:52.000 --> 01:05:57.580 in your mind when you begin a process but you're constantly looking to see if things 01:05:57.580 --> 01:06:04.960 are going to change so you're still the more overriding of the four answers would be to 01:06:04.960 --> 01:06:10.440 judge the rate of change that's not really a question that's more of a comment but you 01:06:10.440 --> 01:06:16.000 can comment but I'd like to hear your comments on that no I agree with what you're saying 01:06:16.000 --> 01:06:19.720 I agree that you have to take into consideration the rate of change but all those physical 01:06:19.720 --> 01:06:23.560 sounds surroundings are going to determine what that rate of change looks like because 01:06:23.560 --> 01:06:27.760 it depends where you're at a grass fire is different from a building fire your physical 01:06:27.760 --> 01:06:33.760 surroundings dictate that so I mean yeah it all plays together and plays nice I understand 01:06:33.760 --> 01:06:41.760 what you're saying but I still feel that my answer is a very viable answer okay fire response 01:06:41.760 --> 01:06:48.200 I need I'm sorry any other questions of the appellant none for me thank you fire response 01:06:48.200 --> 01:06:54.960 this is a direct quote answer B has little to do with making an effective judgment in 01:06:54.960 --> 01:06:59.640 the situation the best answer is a and it comes right out of the text the text does 01:06:59.640 --> 01:07:05.080 not stay anywhere that physical surroundings is the ISOs foundation vote to sustain the 01:07:05.080 --> 01:07:10.760 key and I'd like to add as far as the expectations that are set for from the department since 01:07:10.760 --> 01:07:15.920 it's been brought up at the very beginning of the test we advise people in the strike 01:07:15.920 --> 01:07:21.880 in the instructions on the test booklet to pick the best answer in a hypothetical scenario 01:07:21.880 --> 01:07:27.240 where there were two answers that may be correct you would still be required to pick the best 01:07:27.240 --> 01:07:41.440 answer questions of fire no questions of fire okay anyone like to speak in opposition to 01:07:41.440 --> 01:08:03.920 the appeal seeing none I would entertain a motion I move that we sustain the key I saw 01:08:03.920 --> 01:08:16.080 it discussion I have no discussion all in favor of sustaining the key on question three 01:08:16.080 --> 01:08:26.480 say aye aye or vote with hand that's fine all right chairman I have a request I was 01:08:26.480 --> 01:08:32.840 wondering if we could maybe take a 10-minute break sure and I'd like specifically for you 01:08:32.840 --> 01:08:42.360 and I and miss Lang to to and a commissioner Prado for us to kind of put our heads together 01:08:42.360 --> 01:08:47.280 for a little bit I feel like we need to kind of get recalibrated just a little bit before 01:08:47.280 --> 01:08:52.720 we move forward and then we can come back together at it's what 10 after maybe come 01:08:52.720 --> 01:09:06.360 back at 20 after or 25 after um hang on John 01:09:22.720 --> 01:09:40.000 a little bit yeah. 01:09:40.000 --> 01:10:04.840 All right in order to do that we have to move to executive session so I need a motion for 01:10:04.840 --> 01:10:14.600 us to move to executive session which means for the appellants that you will be placed 01:10:14.600 --> 01:10:22.680 in a waiting room area I mean waiting room situation and let's say probably around 1030 01:10:22.680 --> 01:10:31.400 or so will we will reconvene out of executive session so John I make the motion that we 01:10:31.400 --> 01:10:47.400 move to executive session please I'll second it all in favor say aye aye motion motion 01:10:47.400 --> 01:11:06.760 carries so we will question number nine I call then then come then truck okay he's not 01:11:06.760 --> 01:11:16.800 here all right question nine says an example of an of the accommodation strategy for abating 01:11:16.800 --> 01:11:24.800 or mitigating a hazard would be blank a pre-hydrating crews and having them perform simple stretching 01:11:24.800 --> 01:11:32.280 exercises prior to an assignment be warning a firefighter of a slippery surface see placing 01:11:32.280 --> 01:11:38.320 a roof ladder on a pitched roof that requires ascending and descending on a pitched surface 01:11:38.320 --> 01:11:47.920 d physical fitness programs that include strength and flexibility training for working for for 01:11:47.920 --> 01:11:58.480 work hardening so the key answer is c placing a roof ladder on a pitched roof that requires 01:11:58.480 --> 01:12:10.760 ascending and descending on a pitched surface his appeal says page 128 and this would be 01:12:10.760 --> 01:12:21.680 out of the safety safety officer so page 128 the last sentence of the accommodation paragraph 01:12:21.680 --> 01:12:36.940 states having a water bottle available at each apparatus siting position requires firefighters 01:12:36.940 --> 01:12:43.200 to pre-hydrate while en route to a reported incident other accommodations strategy another 01:12:43.200 --> 01:12:59.560 accommodation strategy so fire response we vote to accept the appeal or accept c and 01:12:59.560 --> 01:13:05.280 a while c is in the book answer a should be considered correct also pre-hydrating crews 01:13:05.280 --> 01:13:09.920 is clearly referenced in the accommodation section simple stretching is under the acclamation 01:13:09.920 --> 01:13:14.520 section if you read the entire section the last few words clearly refer to reducing injuries 01:13:14.520 --> 01:13:27.480 which is the definition of accommodation questions of fire no questions anyone like to speak 01:13:27.480 --> 01:13:39.960 in opposition to the appeal seeing no one I would entertain a motion on question nine 01:13:39.960 --> 01:14:01.840 okay motion to accept a and c in the discussion I have no discussion hearing none all in favor 01:14:01.840 --> 01:14:19.240 say aye aye opposed oh I'm sorry John I saw you okay next is question 12 and read the 01:14:19.240 --> 01:14:34.460 writing Jason small Jason is not here okay question 12 says determining the appropriateness 01:14:34.460 --> 01:14:41.360 of blank is perhaps the most important decision that the incident safety officer has to make 01:14:41.360 --> 01:14:50.120 at the incident scene the answers are risk-taking personal protective equipment air monitoring 01:14:50.120 --> 01:15:07.080 operations the keyed answer is a the appeal says if I can read it to see ISO ISO states 01:15:07.080 --> 01:15:15.440 on page 167 says nothing about judging risk taking from 168 ISO should don PPE that is 01:15:15.440 --> 01:15:25.720 appropriate that is appropriate for the you what is that for the likely potential hazarding 01:15:25.720 --> 01:15:30.560 you should read these crystal this is number four in the sequence of importance to the 01:15:30.560 --> 01:15:39.360 structure of how in ISO arrives on scene and states starts the end get to engage the incident 01:15:39.360 --> 01:15:47.280 PPE is always the most important thing we did we determined this comes before risk taking 01:15:47.280 --> 01:15:53.840 is established the medic model is listed after this send on the very page the paragraph below 01:15:53.840 --> 01:16:07.040 talks about risk and it says the IC decides on the ISO must confirm the risk taking level 01:16:07.040 --> 01:16:20.200 fire response oh yeah fire response fire response right we vote to sustain the key the question 01:16:20.200 --> 01:16:24.840 states most important decision not a decision risk taking is clearly stated as the most 01:16:24.840 --> 01:16:43.800 important questions for fire I have no questions anyone like to speak in opposition there was 01:16:43.800 --> 01:16:54.560 a hand up a minute ago mr. Barzano do you have did you have a comment I know I was actually 01:16:54.560 --> 01:17:06.360 I wanted to clear up what the closed session was about how we were going to go forward 01:17:06.360 --> 01:17:11.960 today just just because I mean it's the open meeting so I was just wondering why we would 01:17:11.960 --> 01:17:16.480 pause in the middle of the open meeting I don't know if that's addressed under the open meetings 01:17:16.480 --> 01:17:23.360 act or or just couldn't understand why we're going it is we we have we are able to do that 01:17:23.360 --> 01:17:31.960 this language you like to yes if you look at the notice on the agenda for today there 01:17:31.960 --> 01:17:36.960 is a section that provides that the commissioners may go into executive session if they feel 01:17:36.960 --> 01:17:43.080 a need to do so and any discussions within that executive session does not have to be 01:17:43.080 --> 01:17:57.400 shared in the open meeting thank you all right any any questions anyone like to speak in 01:17:57.400 --> 01:18:10.920 opposition and commissioners I would entertain as I would entertain a motion I move that 01:18:10.920 --> 01:18:26.840 we sustain the key motion second to sustain the key any further discussion among commissioners 01:18:26.840 --> 01:18:39.520 anything hearing none John no no no discussion thank you all in favor say aye aye opposed 01:18:39.520 --> 01:18:54.720 motion carries next is question 17 mr. Buzaro you're back on oh we also have I'm sorry there 01:18:54.720 --> 01:19:02.920 are look at the let me let me get back to my there are two appeals on this so mr. Buzaro 01:19:02.920 --> 01:19:15.240 and mr. Miller both so as on what is what is like oh that's that's Buzaro and sorry 01:19:15.240 --> 01:19:24.480 I read the comics this morning so and you're not the comedian I didn't mean that okay so 01:19:24.480 --> 01:19:36.680 does it yeah okay um I guess uh most of well I based my appeal on just the civil's right 01:19:36.680 --> 01:19:44.440 the Civil Rights Act of 1964 it just addresses a broad range of of issues and I can't remember 01:19:44.440 --> 01:19:51.520 the the question verbatim if you wouldn't mind reading it to me all right question says 01:19:51.520 --> 01:19:57.200 the Civil Rights Act of 1964 covers state and local government practice was relating 01:19:57.200 --> 01:20:14.600 to blank and the four answers are voting hiring housing education okay thank you yeah I guess 01:20:14.600 --> 01:20:20.720 my argument was to accept multiple answers and I think the department had had made that 01:20:20.720 --> 01:20:24.840 decision anywhere to accept all answers I based my appeal on a different book which 01:20:24.840 --> 01:20:30.160 was the legal consideration book and I don't think the question came out of that so but 01:20:30.160 --> 01:20:45.800 that's all I had okay mr. Miller yes sir there you are now this is directly from my comments 01:20:45.800 --> 01:20:51.640 earlier how we're going to run head-on to an issue this he broke based that appeal verbatim 01:20:51.640 --> 01:20:57.720 of another book that states everything that's in all the answers on this question but we 01:20:57.720 --> 01:21:06.340 can't use it so I'm going to base my appeal out of the book it came out of on page 51 01:21:06.340 --> 01:21:12.020 where that where I believe what I can remember of the question you just read comes from underneath 01:21:12.020 --> 01:21:21.200 workplace diversity where it says opportunity commission ELC title seven of the Civil Rights 01:21:21.200 --> 01:21:31.000 Act of 1964 cover state local governments schools colleges and unions my answer is that 01:21:31.000 --> 01:21:38.400 this question states it's related to education education is my answer and the question says 01:21:38.400 --> 01:21:47.400 related to well here it says schools and colleges that's direct directly education and that's 01:21:47.400 --> 01:21:53.080 the reason that based my answer on that schools and colleges are education question says related 01:21:53.080 --> 01:22:03.120 to which is a broad scope in answering it and my answer is education okay question of 01:22:03.120 --> 01:22:15.200 the appellants I have no questions sorry can I can I get clarification so for mr. Miller 01:22:15.200 --> 01:22:22.840 are you saying that we shouldn't accept all four we should only accept BND it depends 01:22:22.840 --> 01:22:28.800 on the rules we're playing by and I'm not being sarcastic I mean we set a different 01:22:28.800 --> 01:22:33.880 standard in the driver's appeals that we're using today and I don't I don't know why the 01:22:33.880 --> 01:22:40.480 goalposts change today but they did I would say I mean that book has all these answers 01:22:40.480 --> 01:22:46.060 in it the other book not the quoted source material no we're going just by the quoted 01:22:46.060 --> 01:22:53.880 source material so just by this book by our officer book you're saying we should only 01:22:53.880 --> 01:23:03.600 accept B and D right yes ma'am I would I would make that argument as well because what we're 01:23:03.600 --> 01:23:09.740 what we're saying is yes obviously anyone that knows for civil rights that includes 01:23:09.740 --> 01:23:16.000 all of these if we're looking at other prior knowledge or anything like that then we can't 01:23:16.000 --> 01:23:20.160 justify it so we just that's what this that's what our closed meeting was about that we're 01:23:20.160 --> 01:23:25.280 gonna if it's in the book then we can justify we can use it but if it's not in the quoted 01:23:25.280 --> 01:23:35.280 book and we're not right yes so so then I I'm I'm listening to mr. Miller I agree that 01:23:35.280 --> 01:23:56.800 B and D unless someone else can speak on behalf of the other two holding the book 01:23:56.800 --> 01:24:15.740 so we have a we have a situation here commissioners where one appellant says A and D and the other 01:24:15.740 --> 01:24:30.440 one says D and the department is going to accept all the answers and so I think that 01:24:30.440 --> 01:24:53.880 makes sure the problem John I'm not sure that it does I if I understand commissioner Prado's 01:24:53.880 --> 01:25:04.980 concern she's saying that we shouldn't accept B and D or B and C because they're not specifically 01:25:04.980 --> 01:25:32.240 in the book in this book well on page 51 there's that's that the enumerated one and it says 01:25:32.240 --> 01:25:40.400 bail or refuse to hire or discharge any individual so there's the word hiring there and then 01:25:40.400 --> 01:25:49.080 up above it says title seven of the civil rights act covers state and local governments 01:25:49.080 --> 01:26:00.520 and colleges excuse me schools colleges and unions so the education aspect is listed there 01:26:00.520 --> 01:26:05.680 where are you reading I'm sorry I'm on page 51 but I didn't follow you under workplace 01:26:05.680 --> 01:26:14.720 diversity you go down to the second sentence there it says title seven of the civil rights 01:26:14.720 --> 01:26:25.400 act of 1964 covers state and local governments schools colleges and unions so there's your 01:26:25.400 --> 01:26:33.680 education there and then you go down to the next subset it says number one fail or refuse 01:26:33.680 --> 01:26:40.040 to hire so there's the word hiring there right so that would mean to accept B and D then 01:26:40.040 --> 01:26:54.920 my question who can support accepting A and C under this certain section right I understand 01:26:54.920 --> 01:27:11.320 and so back to my response that A and D and the other appellant said D 01:27:11.320 --> 01:27:26.440 so so if we're going to do B and D it's pretty clear but I'm not sure we can do A and D yeah 01:27:26.440 --> 01:27:44.600 I mean I would make a motion that we would accept B and D is there a second who made 01:27:44.600 --> 01:27:56.040 the motion Commissioner Prado okay I'll second that okay the motion is to accept B and D 01:27:56.040 --> 01:28:07.400 I forgot to do one thing so anyone like to speak in opposition to the appeal 01:28:07.400 --> 01:28:14.440 seeing no one all right motion is to accept B and D discussion 01:28:14.440 --> 01:28:28.880 I don't think we can justify accepting A and if this is the appeal that quotes the another 01:28:28.880 --> 01:28:33.320 reference then that I mean the justification even said we can't do that we can't accept 01:28:33.320 --> 01:28:44.960 another reference source material even though our common knowledge says something else but 01:28:44.960 --> 01:29:00.820 yeah I agree with you all right any other discussion okay go ahead Mr. Razel I'm sorry 01:29:00.820 --> 01:29:07.840 I just need a little bit of clarification moving forward so the question came out of 01:29:07.840 --> 01:29:13.880 fire officer principal and practices but the appeal was cited from another source material 01:29:13.880 --> 01:29:19.600 so is that allowed or is that not allowed I know that's kind of been the discussion 01:29:19.600 --> 01:29:28.560 for the day we are not we are not acknowledging the other appeal the the outside source okay 01:29:28.560 --> 01:29:33.840 the two answers that are the motion that's on the floor reflects the two answers that 01:29:33.840 --> 01:29:41.800 are found in the fire officer principles and practices book okay thank you we're trying 01:29:41.800 --> 01:29:52.240 we're trying our best to be consistent and not change not change the goalposts and and 01:29:52.240 --> 01:29:58.000 let's just say we're trying our best to do what we can do so but those two answers that 01:29:58.000 --> 01:30:03.820 the motion come directly from the book that would the material that we're talking about 01:30:03.820 --> 01:30:13.440 so all right fair what we decided in the in the closed meeting though that if if there's 01:30:13.440 --> 01:30:21.280 something that is from the same book but you can justify your other answer source material 01:30:21.280 --> 01:30:26.280 then that's something that that's something that can happen as long as it's not an outside 01:30:26.280 --> 01:30:31.440 source if it's coming from the same book but you can justify and you can accept that your 01:30:31.440 --> 01:30:42.920 other answer is somewhere else listed in the same book then that is something that's possible 01:30:42.920 --> 01:31:11.280 see neither neither appellant asked wait a second all right then be 01:31:11.280 --> 01:31:21.440 an appellant mr. bazano asked that that'd be a and d voting and voting is not mentioned 01:31:21.440 --> 01:31:29.080 in in this paragraph mr. bazano do you know if it's listed anywhere else in this book 01:31:29.080 --> 01:31:36.560 anywhere else in the fire officer book i'm not right after the top of my head commissioner 01:31:36.560 --> 01:31:43.520 like i said i was interpreting it from other source material as well even yeah i know common 01:31:43.520 --> 01:32:07.280 sense we all know but i know where you're at as far as your position 120 hang on just 01:32:07.280 --> 01:32:33.280 a minute 01:32:33.280 --> 01:32:37.040 the other reference i was looking at the other the other reference in that book too 01:32:37.040 --> 01:32:42.440 to the civil rights act and it simply mentions the civil rights act it doesn't go into detail 01:32:42.440 --> 01:32:48.080 so if we look at this when we go with just the detail on page 51 of the book that's what 01:32:48.080 --> 01:32:59.480 we have to deal with um i don't did i actually ask for fire response we we we mentioned it 01:32:59.480 --> 01:33:08.920 but uh because we we have it in front of us so fire response to appeal of question 17 01:33:08.920 --> 01:33:13.240 but to accept all answers it's a faulty question the book that the question came out of is 01:33:13.240 --> 01:33:18.240 only referring to title seven of the civil rights act in 1964 of which is not clearly 01:33:18.240 --> 01:33:22.280 stated in the question the appeal is referring to another source material book and should 01:33:22.280 --> 01:33:31.560 not be considered since it is against the rule set forth 01:33:31.560 --> 01:33:45.280 okay who is right okay go ahead go ahead my only my only comment is that even if not referenced 01:33:45.280 --> 01:33:51.480 in the question because it's referenced because the question comes from that book i mean i 01:33:51.480 --> 01:33:58.120 would i would make the connection that i have to use this but 01:33:58.120 --> 01:34:00.800 that's what that's what meet and confer has said 01:34:00.800 --> 01:34:15.560 all right uh miss who is it miss who is it mr johnson 01:34:15.560 --> 01:34:20.400 yes sir um this question that i'm about to pose is not directly relate well it is related 01:34:20.400 --> 01:34:24.540 to this question but it's about my previous appeal on question number three before the 01:34:24.540 --> 01:34:33.080 closed session you guys it sounded like we're not going to give um the ability for me to 01:34:33.080 --> 01:34:38.360 use a different cited page in the same source material to come up with a reasonable answer 01:34:38.360 --> 01:34:43.000 and now after the closed session it appears that you guys are doing that for other appellants 01:34:43.000 --> 01:34:48.040 so i'm i'm confused as to how we draw that distinction now between before and after i 01:34:48.040 --> 01:34:53.160 pulled i pulled a page number with cited material from a different page in the same source material 01:34:53.160 --> 01:34:57.360 on question three and i don't feel like it was given the same credence that is being 01:34:57.360 --> 01:35:03.080 given now post that meeting i did bring your question up mr johnson 01:35:03.080 --> 01:35:10.120 and and we talked about that that it was it was said that there wasn't enough there wasn't 01:35:10.120 --> 01:35:17.200 enough um overlap i don't know if dr ramsey if you want to jump in but we did specifically 01:35:17.200 --> 01:35:24.760 talk about your question so we did actually uh give it a lot more than than what my and 01:35:24.760 --> 01:35:32.960 i was my personal vote on that mr johnson was uh not so much that my my vote was that 01:35:32.960 --> 01:35:43.520 your your request was a subset of a larger better answer and that's that's why that was 01:35:43.520 --> 01:35:48.520 that's why i voted that way and that's kind of where and i think that keeps us consistent 01:35:48.520 --> 01:35:53.680 and not that that not that we're going to try to be consistent don't get me wrong but 01:35:53.680 --> 01:35:59.720 you know we've got to we're trying our best to do what's right for you guys and and i 01:35:59.720 --> 01:36:07.520 think my i mean i feel that i made the i made that decision based on the larger better answer 01:36:07.520 --> 01:36:14.720 of the two not where it came from in what book so but we did talk about that specifically 01:36:14.720 --> 01:36:29.440 and in the session so all right thank you all right um motion is on the floor are there 01:36:29.440 --> 01:36:46.140 any other comments i have no more motion is on the floor to accept b and d any other discussion 01:36:46.140 --> 01:36:58.400 all in favor of accepting b and d on question 17 say aye aye aye opposed okay question 01:36:58.400 --> 01:37:16.840 18 mr johnson where do you go hold on i'm right here give me just a second okay i looked 01:37:16.840 --> 01:37:21.240 up and you weren't that's a screen and i knew where you had just been so all right let me 01:37:21.240 --> 01:37:33.400 grab my book this came out of real quick okay all right so on question 18 um this came out 01:37:33.400 --> 01:37:40.540 of the fire officer principles and practices book um if you can read the question for me 01:37:40.540 --> 01:37:47.320 and then i'll go into my appeal based off of that i would appreciate it okay frederick 01:37:47.320 --> 01:37:55.520 taylor's theory of scientific management included which of the following principles a division 01:37:55.520 --> 01:38:08.200 of labor b equal pay for equal work c mentoring d unity of command 01:38:08.200 --> 01:38:15.080 okay thank you uh so i believe that another acceptable answer in addition to the key answer 01:38:15.080 --> 01:38:22.960 is b equal pay for equal work where i'm gathering that information is off of page 113 um under 01:38:22.960 --> 01:38:29.020 the scientific management heading and the frederick wenslow taylor heading specifically um it 01:38:29.020 --> 01:38:33.360 talks about how scientific management is a breaking down of work task into their constituent 01:38:33.360 --> 01:38:37.800 elements uh the timing of each element based on repeated stopwatch studies and then the 01:38:37.800 --> 01:38:43.480 part i keyed in on was the fixing of peace rate compensation based on those studies that 01:38:43.480 --> 01:38:49.400 terminology the fixing of peace rate compensation essentially means equal pay for equal work 01:38:49.400 --> 01:38:56.240 so that's where my that's where my appeal is coming from um so that's that's the gist 01:38:56.240 --> 01:39:00.480 of my appeal that's that's where i pulled it from and i'd like to hear any questions 01:39:00.480 --> 01:39:08.320 or discussion based off that 01:39:08.320 --> 01:39:20.040 questions of the appellate i'm on page 113 i'm not seeing that language 01:39:20.040 --> 01:39:25.960 commissioner if you look at the top of 113 on the right hand column it is uh the end 01:39:25.960 --> 01:39:32.320 of the second sentence and the beginning of the third okay all right thank you very much 01:39:32.320 --> 01:39:45.200 you're welcome. 01:40:02.320 --> 01:40:19.440 mr johnson can you help me a little bit sure okay so let's go down to taylor's four principles 01:40:19.440 --> 01:40:28.160 of scientific management where quote they're summarized one two three four right um replace 01:40:28.160 --> 01:40:36.480 rule of thumb work methods with methods based on a scientific study of the task scientifically 01:40:36.480 --> 01:40:45.120 select train and develop each worker rather than passively leaving workers to train themselves 01:40:45.120 --> 01:40:52.320 number three cooperate with the workers to ensure that the scientifically developed methods 01:40:52.320 --> 01:41:01.200 are being followed number four divide work nearly equally between managers and workers 01:41:01.200 --> 01:41:09.040 so that the managers apply scientific management principles to planning the work and the workers 01:41:09.040 --> 01:41:16.920 actually perform the tasks then the last little section under that heading says factories 01:41:16.920 --> 01:41:23.000 that implemented these principles including hemry ford's model t automobile factories 01:41:23.000 --> 01:41:29.720 achieved impressive productivity versions of scientific management can still be found 01:41:29.720 --> 01:41:36.640 in the 21st century workplace so i guess when i was reading through this i kind of focused 01:41:36.640 --> 01:41:44.960 on that to see if i could pull the the equal pay out of that and i really couldn't you 01:41:44.960 --> 01:41:51.160 know i do see it on the page up there and so that's where i am trying i understand what 01:41:51.160 --> 01:41:54.480 you're saying it's not listed under those four principles of scientific management but 01:41:54.480 --> 01:42:00.600 it is least listed in the same heading the same topic area under the same person who 01:42:00.600 --> 01:42:05.160 came up with those ideas and it even has a sentence in there that scientific management 01:42:05.160 --> 01:42:10.400 is best based on the breaking down of these things that i mentioned and the fixing of 01:42:10.400 --> 01:42:15.540 uh piece rate compensation is one of those things it's all within the same context it's 01:42:15.540 --> 01:42:23.800 all within the same heading so it's not like i'm pulling this out of another source material 01:42:23.800 --> 01:42:27.760 i'm pulling it straight out of the same paragraphs where the answer you're saying is found out 01:42:27.760 --> 01:42:35.600 of is located right right right i grant you that i'll just try okay all right i'm trying 01:42:35.600 --> 01:42:44.280 to get you there i'm trying to get you i know i appreciate it thank you the problem that 01:42:44.280 --> 01:42:52.080 i that i saw with it is peace and and and i understand your interpretation of it but 01:42:52.080 --> 01:43:01.880 peace rate work peace rate compensation isn't really in one sense it is equal equal pay 01:43:01.880 --> 01:43:08.640 because it's equal rate but you can work harder and make more money and that's and so peace 01:43:08.640 --> 01:43:19.760 rate is peace is not equal pay for equal work it's it's the consistency of of the the rate 01:43:19.760 --> 01:43:27.080 not necessarily the work itself so if the fireman if when i was thinking through this 01:43:27.080 --> 01:43:33.040 it would be like so if you lift a 10-foot ladder you get paid more than if you lift 01:43:33.040 --> 01:43:37.760 an 8-foot ladder i mean that would be there you have a rate for a 10-foot ladder and a 01:43:37.760 --> 01:43:42.680 rate for an 8-foot ladder i'm being i'm being somewhat silly in that sense but that's the 01:43:42.680 --> 01:43:46.720 that would be the difference and that's not what we're what we're dealing that's not what 01:43:46.720 --> 01:43:53.200 i don't think that's what taylor was dealing with either uh so 01:43:53.200 --> 01:43:58.960 and just to kind of follow that up i do agree that the concept of equal pay for equal work 01:43:58.960 --> 01:44:06.080 is included under that heading i see that and where i'm struggling is it says frederick 01:44:06.080 --> 01:44:12.480 taylor's theory of scientific management included which of the following principles and then 01:44:12.480 --> 01:44:20.760 we're we're tasked with what is the most correct answer it is an answer but is that the most 01:44:20.760 --> 01:44:25.320 correct answer that's that's kind of where i'm struggling mr johnson i understand where 01:44:25.320 --> 01:44:29.440 you're where you're coming from i also just kind of want to go to go back to what commissioner 01:44:29.440 --> 01:44:34.680 ramsey said he said that he can he even verified what i had in this appeal when he said that 01:44:34.680 --> 01:44:39.320 he can see that it basically means equal pay for equal work he even said what my appeal 01:44:39.320 --> 01:44:51.480 was no i said equal rate equal rate peace work means an equal rate not equal not equal 01:44:51.480 --> 01:44:59.520 pay just to make sure that you understand don't 01:44:59.520 --> 01:45:07.160 misquote me i said that peace work means equal rate you get a penny for every see i grew 01:45:07.160 --> 01:45:13.440 up in a in a mill town where they people were paid by the number of sweatshirts they made 01:45:13.440 --> 01:45:18.320 in a day and you had the same amount of money for every sweatshirt you made but if you worked 01:45:18.320 --> 01:45:24.040 really really really hard you can make more money than somebody who didn't that's the 01:45:24.040 --> 01:45:31.640 that's the peace rate the i mean sorry the the peace work uh one the rate is the same 01:45:31.640 --> 01:45:37.680 but the amount of work done is determined by the worker and that's not what he talked 01:45:37.680 --> 01:45:50.840 about here so all right thank you 01:45:50.840 --> 01:46:00.840 any other any other comments i would entertain a motion sorry oh do we get have we not done 01:46:00.840 --> 01:46:13.200 that i'm sorry this copy the way these are copied is really confusing all right uh we're 01:46:13.200 --> 01:46:23.480 on question 17 right department response 18 we're on 18 18 all right i have the appeal 01:46:23.480 --> 01:46:29.120 on one page and the and the question on another page with a response so i'm sorry so question 01:46:29.120 --> 01:46:34.560 18 the fire response is sustain the key the question and answer reference together the 01:46:34.560 --> 01:46:39.040 main premise of this theory is stated on page 113 is to break down jobs and too simple to 01:46:39.040 --> 01:46:43.440 follow steps that have been determined to be the most efficient way to perform a job 01:46:43.440 --> 01:47:09.520 okay questions of fire hearing none i if we could for a second um 01:47:09.520 --> 01:47:17.200 does it specifically say division of labor anywhere here tell me i know the concept is 01:47:17.200 --> 01:47:28.440 presented but does it specifically say division of labor it says divide work equally okay 01:47:28.440 --> 01:47:35.520 i see that but does it say division of labor but that's really but that's really different 01:47:35.520 --> 01:47:41.000 okay division of labor and divide work nearly are pretty much the same i don't think anyone 01:47:41.000 --> 01:47:46.440 can draw a distinction between that but piece rate compensation and equal pay for equal 01:47:46.440 --> 01:48:08.200 work those are different division of labor and equal pay for equal work are different 01:48:08.200 --> 01:48:15.120 is what you're saying no no you're you're you're asking if division of labor and divide 01:48:15.120 --> 01:48:22.240 work equally can be can be interpreted as one in the same and i i think yes but i could 01:48:22.240 --> 01:48:27.720 interpret it the same but i was asking is it specifically is that phraseology of those 01:48:27.720 --> 01:48:32.920 terms specifically mentioned that's all i was asking i know i guess i was trying to 01:48:32.920 --> 01:48:39.520 i was trying to see if could we say the same for um for the piece rate compensation and 01:48:39.520 --> 01:48:44.600 equal pay for equal work could we make the same comparison to those two terms so that 01:48:44.600 --> 01:48:57.720 we could accept b but i don't think we can yeah okay 01:48:57.720 --> 01:49:12.640 mr prude yes can you hear me yes sir okay in opposition to the appeal the only thing 01:49:12.640 --> 01:49:19.160 that i could say that we could in which we could accept both answers is if the author 01:49:19.160 --> 01:49:27.480 somewhere in the book defined piece rate compensation as equal pay for equal work and i don't find 01:49:27.480 --> 01:49:53.080 that anywhere in the book okay thank you commissioners i would entertain a motion a motion that we 01:49:53.080 --> 01:50:17.640 sustain the key second any discussion i have no discussion okay all in favor say aye okay 01:50:17.640 --> 01:50:36.840 next is question 44 all right you guys ready rezel um wait we have to change books hang 01:50:36.840 --> 01:50:53.040 on 01:50:53.040 --> 01:50:57.320 we feel your pain but we have it all we have them all at the same time so you have to be 01:50:57.320 --> 01:51:07.040 test on we're going to find them so all right mr roselle where are we yes sir right here 01:51:07.040 --> 01:51:16.520 my appeal is drawn upon logic and critical thinking so we'll see how this goes the topic 01:51:16.520 --> 01:51:23.760 that the questions regarding is prioritize and execute which the author in layman's terms 01:51:23.760 --> 01:51:29.520 breaks it down to relax look around make a call it's the idea of slowing down figuring 01:51:29.520 --> 01:51:37.520 out what the the correct next move is and uh and acting upon that part of that is like 01:51:37.520 --> 01:51:43.360 the question says through careful contingency planning a leader can anticipate likely challenges 01:51:43.360 --> 01:51:50.600 that could arise and i'm not arguing that but if you flip back over to page 158 same 01:51:50.600 --> 01:52:00.320 source material the second full paragraph goes into depth about the extensive training 01:52:00.320 --> 01:52:09.880 used to learn the prioritize and execute or prioritize and move philosophy and it says 01:52:09.880 --> 01:52:14.320 this process was not intuitive to most people but can be learned built upon and greatly 01:52:14.320 --> 01:52:21.980 enhanced through many many iterations of training so my argument although it it's not verbatim 01:52:21.980 --> 01:52:29.040 from the text i i will acknowledge the question is verbatim from the text the answer logic 01:52:29.040 --> 01:52:34.680 would say that ultimately it was the extensively designed training that allowed for the contingency 01:52:34.680 --> 01:52:40.280 plan the plans to be created in the first place so without the training you wouldn't 01:52:40.280 --> 01:52:52.600 be able to develop the contingency plans effectively okay thank you questions of the appellant 01:53:10.280 --> 01:53:37.200 questions no there's product questions no i'd like i'm curious about the department 01:53:37.200 --> 01:53:51.860 okay mr baynes i'm i'm i'm there i'm still looking at page 158 that the gentleman referenced 01:53:51.860 --> 01:53:56.000 and i was trying to make sure i didn't go too fast so please forgive me for being a 01:53:56.000 --> 01:54:01.080 little slow no that's not the we want to do this right as best we can so 01:54:01.080 --> 01:54:18.280 because we are in the same book same reference material so we're good we're good there the 01:54:18.280 --> 01:54:38.920 question is can this particular answer be considered the best answer for this question 01:54:38.920 --> 01:54:48.920 why don't we go ahead and do the fire response which might spark either okay might even might 01:54:48.920 --> 01:54:57.880 spark more discussion or it may not so um fire response 01:54:57.880 --> 01:55:04.760 you're you're muted you're muted there we go we vote to sustain the key it's verbatim 01:55:04.760 --> 01:55:10.080 from the book the correct answer is c d is not a correct answer because the training 01:55:10.080 --> 01:55:14.000 that the appeals referring to was happening right then and it required the team leader 01:55:14.000 --> 01:55:18.040 and team to make decisions under pressure as it was happening the question is clearly 01:55:18.040 --> 01:55:22.400 asking how someone or the team can respond or plan to respond to something before they 01:55:22.400 --> 01:55:27.880 happen which is clearly not happening in present time like a training scenario this makes d 01:55:27.880 --> 01:55:46.160 the faulty answer and c should be considered should be the only accepted answer 01:55:46.160 --> 01:55:56.520 questions of fire isn't that why you train that you can be put in those situations i 01:55:56.520 --> 01:56:00.880 mean the training is part of your hands-on learning it's putting you in scenarios and 01:56:00.880 --> 01:56:08.680 coming up with try it's kind of like safe safe trial and error 01:56:08.680 --> 01:56:15.840 i completely agree with you commissioner i completely agree with you as the training 01:56:15.840 --> 01:56:23.240 officer so commissioner prado do i hear you saying then that d could also be a correct 01:56:23.240 --> 01:56:31.160 answer yes i could add something more to this to distinguish 01:56:31.160 --> 01:56:40.040 between the two if you like if training happens all the time and covers a broad arrangement 01:56:40.040 --> 01:56:47.400 of topics if i'm going to attack a mission and i have to plan make contingency careful 01:56:47.400 --> 01:56:53.640 contingency planning that's very specific to that mission that i'm about to carry out 01:56:53.640 --> 01:56:59.280 so we're going from a broad general topic of training to know how to do my job to very 01:56:59.280 --> 01:57:05.120 specific mission oriented i got to prioritize and execute these specific things and then 01:57:05.120 --> 01:57:12.880 i have to plan a contingency for those things training makes me better at doing that but 01:57:12.880 --> 01:57:25.760 this is specific to that point i can see a distinction between planning 01:57:25.760 --> 01:57:32.960 versus training i can see a distinction we have a lot of training so that when we get 01:57:32.960 --> 01:57:40.240 to the real time situation we can develop a plan of action without that training it's 01:57:40.240 --> 01:57:46.520 very difficult to to to provide an adequate plan of action so i do see a difference there 01:57:46.520 --> 01:57:52.320 between the the training and the planning i just want to make sure that when i'm looking 01:57:52.320 --> 01:57:58.640 at this question stepping into and examine these shoes that that that i'm giving the 01:57:58.640 --> 01:58:23.920 benefit of the doubt when i see this 01:58:23.920 --> 01:58:28.560 hey i'm sorry i was i was out of commission somebody bring me off the commission 01:58:28.560 --> 01:58:38.000 no um somebody bring me back to we were with the discussion when we when we left was that 01:58:38.000 --> 01:58:48.880 it was perhaps bnd have we gone beyond that cnd cnd i'm sorry 01:58:53.600 --> 01:59:02.880 okay um is there anyone like to speak in opposition to the appeal 01:59:02.880 --> 01:59:17.280 seeing no one hearing no one um commissioners i would entertain a motion on question 44 01:59:24.560 --> 01:59:27.680 uh i would i understand what you're saying um 01:59:27.680 --> 01:59:38.560 mr skipper but uh i do understand so i was i read the second part uh through what would 01:59:38.560 --> 01:59:44.160 make more sense through a careful contingency planning a leader can anticipate likely challenges 01:59:44.160 --> 01:59:50.480 that could arise uh or through extensively designed training a leader could anticipate 01:59:50.480 --> 01:59:56.720 likely challenges that could arise during an execution i understand and i uh but i think 01:59:56.720 --> 02:00:03.440 that for this question i don't think i don't think there's enough of a um distinction yeah 02:00:03.440 --> 02:00:11.520 so i i would i would make a motion that we accept c and d as the answer 02:00:14.240 --> 02:00:22.000 i'll second that motion it's been moved and seconded to accept answer c and d for question 44 02:00:22.000 --> 02:00:23.920 discussion 02:00:23.920 --> 02:00:32.960 no discussion for me 02:00:32.960 --> 02:00:41.760 no discussion all in favor of the motion to accept c and d say aye 02:00:42.720 --> 02:00:44.640 aye opposed 02:00:44.640 --> 02:01:00.080 okay um when i left for just a second someone still had a question about the the closed meeting 02:01:00.080 --> 02:01:10.240 discussion and um i just want to to bring just to clarify our discussion in that meeting was to try 02:01:10.240 --> 02:01:20.960 to get us a reading of what the legal ramifications were of our decisions based on chapter 43 which is 02:01:20.960 --> 02:01:28.240 the civil service code for the state uh meet and confer and even local rules but it was our 02:01:28.240 --> 02:01:37.120 discussion was more of a legal the legal issue of it uh so so i just i say that just for clarification 02:01:37.120 --> 02:01:43.520 that we were dealing with we were trying to get a sense of the legal issues that we were 02:01:43.520 --> 02:01:50.000 that we were dealing with at this point so okay now question 45 02:01:54.960 --> 02:02:07.680 mr pazano yes sir can you read the uh question to me please um hang on just a second yes i i i can 02:02:07.680 --> 02:02:13.040 i just have to make sure that i find it why do i have 02:02:13.040 --> 02:02:20.080 are there two appeals or three three appeals okay i'm sorry 02:02:24.960 --> 02:02:32.480 the printer is messing this all up 44 02:02:32.480 --> 02:02:39.280 okay all right i got you 02:02:39.280 --> 02:02:50.160 your appeals are on front and back of the paper and so anyway the question um that part i can do 02:02:50.160 --> 02:02:56.880 frontline leaders must have trust and confidence in blank to know that they are empowered to make 02:02:56.880 --> 02:03:11.280 decisions the answers are their subordinates b themselves c their policies d the senior leaders 02:03:11.280 --> 02:03:17.760 the keyed answer is d their senior leaders 02:03:21.120 --> 02:03:25.520 now oh again since we've got mr pazano up 02:03:25.520 --> 02:03:36.160 i'll let you go ahead okay thank you um i based my appeal on the concept that the author is 02:03:36.160 --> 02:03:47.760 describing uh decentralized command and um so he was speaking about having confidence in not only 02:03:47.760 --> 02:03:53.680 your senior leadership but also your subordinates and that's why i think that um 02:03:53.680 --> 02:04:04.960 the question or the answer a would would be the same or also acceptable so compared to uh answer 02:04:04.960 --> 02:04:12.800 d if we look at the page that it's referenced from i believe it's referenced from 171 in uh extreme 02:04:12.800 --> 02:04:21.440 ownership let's see uh for any leader placing full faith and trust in junior leaders with less 02:04:21.440 --> 02:04:26.240 experience and allowing them to manage their teams is a difficult thing to embrace it requires 02:04:26.240 --> 02:04:32.400 tremendous trust and confidence in those frontline leaders so when he says frontline leaders i i 02:04:32.400 --> 02:04:38.320 believe that to be referencing to the uh junior leaders who must very clearly understand the 02:04:38.320 --> 02:04:43.280 strategic mission and ensure their immediate tactical decisions ultimately contribute to 02:04:43.280 --> 02:04:50.880 accomplishing the overarching goals frontline leaders must also have must also have trust 02:04:50.880 --> 02:04:55.120 and confidence in their senior leaders to know that they are empowered to make decisions and 02:04:55.120 --> 02:05:07.280 that their senior leaders will back them up okay thank you uh mr johnson 02:05:08.800 --> 02:05:09.920 anything to add 02:05:09.920 --> 02:05:20.080 um no sir i think mr pesano pretty much stumped it up well um i pulled my appeal from the same page 02:05:20.080 --> 02:05:25.280 that the department like he was talking about got their answer off 171 like he said the whole whole 02:05:25.280 --> 02:05:30.720 idea of this was decentralized command and the word also where it says frontline leaders must 02:05:30.720 --> 02:05:36.400 also have trust and confidence in their senior leaders that also is there because the entire 02:05:36.400 --> 02:05:41.360 paragraph before is talking about how the the top has to have confidence in their junior leaders 02:05:41.360 --> 02:05:45.280 so that's that's where i based my peel off the same information that he pulled his from 02:05:45.280 --> 02:05:50.240 okay thank you mr rozelle 02:05:50.240 --> 02:05:54.640 nothing to add there you are 02:05:54.640 --> 02:06:02.240 question of the appellants questions to the appellants 02:06:06.400 --> 02:06:14.240 um 02:06:14.240 --> 02:06:21.280 so you know i um 02:06:21.280 --> 02:06:30.560 i did struggle with this question so i want you to know that this was not an easy question for me 02:06:31.440 --> 02:06:47.600 and you know as a as a platoon leader you know in the military 02:06:47.600 --> 02:06:54.320 did my authority come from the subordinates or did the authority come from 02:06:55.440 --> 02:07:02.000 the um the senior superiors that's kind of where you know where does my authority come from 02:07:02.000 --> 02:07:09.280 and really the authority came from periods now my juniors have to have confidence in me 02:07:09.280 --> 02:07:17.680 but really my authority to act and to do things comes from the senior so i could i could see where 02:07:17.680 --> 02:07:24.400 there's the need to embrace the juniors but when you ask the at least for me 02:07:25.680 --> 02:07:32.080 when you when you when you're asked where does my authority come from it really comes from my 02:07:32.080 --> 02:07:38.400 superiors rather than from my subordinates so that's kind of how i look at it now i don't know 02:07:38.400 --> 02:07:49.840 if things have changed significantly that's just how i viewed it so i i appreciate that thank you 02:07:49.840 --> 02:07:56.160 commissioner um i think it's just a matter of mindset too i i agree with you your legal 02:07:56.160 --> 02:08:02.080 authority comes from your superiors it comes from you know um the authority either comes from your 02:08:02.080 --> 02:08:08.480 badge that you are pinned with i guess i take a little different idea that a lot of authority 02:08:08.480 --> 02:08:14.720 comes from those who you ask to follow you as well i would not have any authority should no one 02:08:15.520 --> 02:08:21.920 believe in me or want to you know follow me and especially with this with this type of um 02:08:21.920 --> 02:08:31.440 with this passage here i i took it as meaning that um i think it was life babin who was the one who 02:08:31.440 --> 02:08:38.720 who wrote this section i took it to mean that he was he was he was expecting his frontline leaders 02:08:38.720 --> 02:08:45.200 which are his subordinates or his junior leaders to have um full faith and confidence in himself 02:08:45.200 --> 02:08:51.600 and that he had that he also had full faith and confidence in them so that's where i got that's 02:08:51.600 --> 02:08:58.000 kind of where i was was going with my uh with my appeal oh i could see that is goes both what you 02:08:58.000 --> 02:09:07.680 know goes up and down and yeah i i see i guess you know in the final analysis i mean if all the 02:09:08.800 --> 02:09:15.200 juniors run away yeah i still have authority but that authority is based upon the ones that have 02:09:15.200 --> 02:09:21.360 given it to me right and this is a really hard and this is a really hard question just because 02:09:21.360 --> 02:09:28.960 it is simply stated if i take that one sentence yes okay yes they got me that's true but i i take 02:09:28.960 --> 02:09:37.840 it as a bigger picture and that's that's kind of where i'm coming from any other questions of the 02:09:37.840 --> 02:09:45.600 appellants second mr razelle 02:09:45.600 --> 02:09:54.080 thank you i just want to reiterate also the fact that the the test writers excluded the word also 02:09:54.080 --> 02:10:00.880 from the otherwise verbatim text question which confounds the ambiguity of the answer even further 02:10:01.840 --> 02:10:08.720 it's almost as if the test writer recognized that the author had spent the the whole paragraph 02:10:08.720 --> 02:10:16.000 talking about trust and confidence in other people and and finishes the paragraph with the test 02:10:16.000 --> 02:10:23.600 question so if the well i can wait for the department to give their ruling but i don't 02:10:23.600 --> 02:10:29.280 think it's fair to say it's verbatim from the text when the question itself is technically not 02:10:29.280 --> 02:10:33.040 verbatim from the text i think that's important to recognize 02:10:33.040 --> 02:10:47.440 thank you anyone else any other questions okay fire response 02:10:47.440 --> 02:10:56.160 we vote to sustain the key stated in the text the text does not state the frontline leaders 02:10:56.160 --> 02:10:59.440 must have trust and confidence in their subordinates the appeals are trying to 02:10:59.440 --> 02:11:03.520 make a correlation that junior leaders must have trust and confidence in their subordinates 02:11:03.520 --> 02:11:05.280 and the text does not state this either 02:11:05.280 --> 02:11:16.320 question of questions of fire 02:11:23.200 --> 02:11:26.240 this is supposed to be commissioners commissioners 02:11:26.240 --> 02:11:36.000 i'm struggling i'm struggling because i i can see it both ways 02:11:36.000 --> 02:11:44.080 you know commissioner uh commissioner you know you you you made reference 02:11:44.080 --> 02:11:52.320 to your educational background and and answering some questions and so when i think back to my 02:11:52.320 --> 02:11:58.880 years in the military and even you know my training and rotc prior to that you know i just 02:11:58.880 --> 02:12:05.840 i mean you got you got a need both ways you need you need you need the support of those above you 02:12:05.840 --> 02:12:11.920 but when you have stripes or or whatever you have on your you know you need the the people below 02:12:11.920 --> 02:12:17.120 you to support you as well i mean it's it's it's you know we've got two areas here and i'm 02:12:17.120 --> 02:12:22.080 struggling basically i'm struggling with this because i don't want to be cavalier with people's 02:12:22.080 --> 02:12:26.240 career i want to i want to make sure i give them the best answer 02:12:26.240 --> 02:12:40.240 anyone like to speak in opposition to the appeal 02:12:40.240 --> 02:12:46.640 commissioners i would entertain a motion 02:12:48.640 --> 02:12:57.520 mr mr johnson sorry thank you i appreciate it uh what i'm struggling with is i don't understand 02:12:57.520 --> 02:13:02.560 how the department is saying that the the text or the material the cited reference material doesn't 02:13:02.560 --> 02:13:08.400 specifically talk about putting faith and trust in junior leaders i'm on page 171 under that 02:13:08.400 --> 02:13:14.480 paragraph talking about decentralized command and it says for any leader placing full faith and 02:13:14.480 --> 02:13:19.680 trust in junior leaders with less experience and allowing them to manage their teams is a difficult 02:13:19.680 --> 02:13:25.280 thing to embrace it requires tremendous trust and confidence in those frontline leaders who 02:13:25.280 --> 02:13:30.000 must very clearly understand the strategic mission and ensure that their immediate tactical decisions 02:13:30.000 --> 02:13:35.200 ultimately contribute to accomplishing the overarching goals this is where it comes to 02:13:35.200 --> 02:13:40.400 that other the frontline leaders must also have trust and confidence in their senior leaders the 02:13:40.400 --> 02:13:45.760 reason that has that sentence is because everything else in that paragraph in the cited source material 02:13:45.760 --> 02:13:49.440 has been talking about placing trust and confidence in those junior leaders 02:13:49.440 --> 02:14:01.520 mr skipper i'll go chief skipper i'll give you a chance to respond to that if you'd like 02:14:01.520 --> 02:14:07.520 the whole section you just read greg was read from the perspective of a senior leader 02:14:08.240 --> 02:14:15.040 and how he feels towards a junior leader the question is asking frontline leaders must have 02:14:15.040 --> 02:14:20.480 trust and confidence in blank to know that they are empowered to make decisions so if you're a 02:14:20.480 --> 02:14:26.800 frontline leader and your senior leadership doesn't empower you to make decisions then you won't and 02:14:26.800 --> 02:14:36.240 that's basically what that whole section just said mention that last sentence again for me please 02:14:36.240 --> 02:14:42.160 the last sentence you mentioned i said that if if frontline leaders are not empowered which is the 02:14:42.160 --> 02:14:47.840 word that the question uses by their senior leadership which was the perspective of that 02:14:47.840 --> 02:14:53.280 whole section that greg just read then frontline leaders won't make decisions and they'll just 02:14:53.280 --> 02:15:07.120 always push them up the chain of command i'll make a motion mr here yes sir that we accept uh 02:15:07.120 --> 02:15:12.000 answers a and d i'll second 02:15:12.000 --> 02:15:18.640 okay motion seconded to accept answers a and d 02:15:21.200 --> 02:15:24.800 discussion i have none 02:15:24.800 --> 02:15:31.680 my question in this whole thing was 02:15:31.680 --> 02:15:41.120 the the assumption that a subordinate is a junior leader 02:15:41.120 --> 02:15:49.280 and i'm not sure where the junior leader and subordinates are separated 02:15:51.360 --> 02:15:58.160 however that for that reason i'm i'm going to vote for a and c 02:15:58.160 --> 02:16:04.960 i don't know where the separation was between is between you know is it is a junior leader if we 02:16:04.960 --> 02:16:12.320 put it into a fire situation is the senior leader the captain and the junior leader the subordinate 02:16:12.320 --> 02:16:19.040 and the firefighters the i'm sorry the j the captain is the junior leader and the subordinates 02:16:19.040 --> 02:16:25.840 are the firefighters or i mean that's the that was the problem that i was having and i think 02:16:25.840 --> 02:16:31.920 for that reason i think both answers need to be there a and d you mean a and d yeah you said c 02:16:31.920 --> 02:16:35.120 so i'm sorry a and d i'm sorry thank you 02:16:35.120 --> 02:16:44.800 so all right no other discussion we better vote we gotta vote we gotta vote 02:16:44.800 --> 02:16:49.760 yeah all in favor say aye aye all right okay 02:16:49.760 --> 02:16:56.960 next is question 54 02:17:06.320 --> 02:17:14.800 mr die there he is yes sir he waited patiently 02:17:14.800 --> 02:17:25.040 uh my my appeal is just based on the principle of the the initial sentence the question itself 02:17:25.040 --> 02:17:28.880 just simply ask you which of the following statements is true 02:17:30.640 --> 02:17:37.120 and when you get into the reference material on the page that it states it it goes through 02:17:37.120 --> 02:17:43.760 two phases of overhaul there's free control and there's post control sort of depending 02:17:43.760 --> 02:17:48.000 on which phase you're in all of the choices would be correct 02:17:58.320 --> 02:18:03.920 okay questions of the appellant commissioners 02:18:03.920 --> 02:18:18.400 um in my reading of this particular question i'm on page um 190 at the very top 02:18:18.400 --> 02:18:27.040 it says overhaul may be performed in the following two phases pre-control and post-control 02:18:28.560 --> 02:18:33.840 um and then as i went back and read the material that preceded it and went 02:18:33.840 --> 02:18:40.560 afterward it seemed like the only answer that seemed appropriate was the one that mentioned 02:18:40.560 --> 02:18:51.040 before and after which would have been a before overhaul may be done either before or after the 02:18:51.040 --> 02:19:02.320 fire is under control which was pre-control and post-control um i didn't really see those d and 02:19:02.320 --> 02:19:12.480 c as being uh excuse me i didn't really see b c and d as being appropriate because it said 02:19:15.280 --> 02:19:23.200 before and after so if there's a way you can help me uh mr die i'd greatly appreciate it 02:19:23.200 --> 02:19:31.680 i was just looking at the simple fact that if it says that uh overhaul has to be done after the 02:19:31.680 --> 02:19:40.000 fire is under control yes that would be in your post-control overhaul yeah so just that that's 02:19:40.000 --> 02:19:45.520 what i've based it on it i may be way off base i just when i read the question it says which 02:19:45.520 --> 02:19:51.200 of the following are true they all rang true to me just depending on what phase of overhaul that 02:19:51.200 --> 02:20:00.080 you're in so i mean if this appeal is not valid that's that's perfectly fine i'm just uh it just 02:20:00.080 --> 02:20:04.960 i had a hard time with that question let's let's go to let's go to question let's go to answer c 02:20:04.960 --> 02:20:10.880 for a second and let's just see if that one let's just kind of mash on this one a little bit it says 02:20:10.880 --> 02:20:18.640 overhaul should never be done before the fire is under control yes sir so that would be that would 02:20:18.640 --> 02:20:29.040 be your post-control yeah yeah uh before before the fire is under control and then you know to me 02:20:29.040 --> 02:20:35.920 that's pre isn't it in that pre before your fire is under control will be pre-control yes sir right 02:20:35.920 --> 02:20:44.800 right so if you say overhaul should never be done in in pre-control then that contradicts 02:20:44.800 --> 02:20:53.280 you know that's not a true statement it has to be done both before and after yes before the fire is 02:20:53.280 --> 02:21:01.200 under control and then after so just by taking that one you could not say that all four are correct 02:21:01.200 --> 02:21:11.360 you know so and to me the one that was the most correct was was a so yes sir i accept that that's 02:21:11.360 --> 02:21:19.760 perfectly fine um all right good i had a hard time with it i guess i was wrestling with you i wanted 02:21:19.760 --> 02:21:24.240 to make sure i gave you every benefit that's perfectly fine i thank you you're welcome 02:21:24.240 --> 02:21:29.920 other questions of the appellant fire response 02:21:29.920 --> 02:21:36.960 we vote to sustain the key the book clearly states the overhaul can be 02:21:36.960 --> 02:21:40.720 performed pre-control and post-control this makes a the best answer 02:21:44.160 --> 02:21:52.880 questions of fire i have no questions of fire i have a comment that that 02:21:52.880 --> 02:21:58.640 again it's it's always go for the best answer 02:21:58.640 --> 02:22:06.160 and if there are two that you're dealing with go with the best one and so 02:22:08.080 --> 02:22:17.600 anyone like to speak in opposition to the appeal hearing none commissioners i would entertain a motion 02:22:17.600 --> 02:22:27.040 i'll make a motion that we accept or we sustain the key i'll second discussion 02:22:27.040 --> 02:22:31.520 hearing none all in favor say aye 02:22:32.720 --> 02:22:41.120 aye 54 sustain the key and 58 02:22:41.120 --> 02:22:53.120 i guess that's me in that he's not here 02:22:53.120 --> 02:23:02.080 all right um question says what is the primary concern 02:23:02.080 --> 02:23:09.040 in roof dental what is the primary concern in roof ventilation a the size of the opening the 02:23:09.040 --> 02:23:16.240 location of the opening what type of tool to use in making the opening or the safety of firefighting 02:23:16.240 --> 02:23:25.440 personnel and the keyed answer is d the safety of the firefighter person the firefighting personnel 02:23:26.400 --> 02:23:37.760 uh the appeal says on a handbook of tactics page 259 hang on let me get there 02:23:51.360 --> 02:23:57.280 there with me um 02:23:57.280 --> 02:24:00.720 all right 02:24:00.720 --> 02:24:18.560 okay the appeal says uh first paragraph of page 259 the first step in making any ventilation opening 02:24:18.560 --> 02:24:25.680 is to locate the proper site usually as close to directly over over the fire as safe as is safe 02:24:25.680 --> 02:24:33.200 um so he says that the another answer b is the correct answer that would be the location of the 02:24:33.200 --> 02:24:39.200 opening so fire response 02:24:39.200 --> 02:24:47.600 vote to sustain the key book clearly states in the second column about four lines down 02:24:47.600 --> 02:24:51.200 that the safety of the members performing the task is always the first concern 02:24:51.200 --> 02:24:55.200 appeal is based on the sequence of cutting the hole and not the concerns 02:24:55.200 --> 02:25:06.000 questions of fire i do have a question of fire uh so so chief chief skipper 02:25:06.000 --> 02:25:13.600 when does the the uh the location and the size of the hole when does that become important 02:25:16.240 --> 02:25:18.480 after the safety of the firefighters is concerned 02:25:18.480 --> 02:25:26.720 it comes when when you decide that you're going to actually cut a hole then we start looking at 02:25:26.720 --> 02:25:32.640 hey we need to cut a hole this big we need to put it over the location of the fire so the fire is 02:25:32.640 --> 02:25:37.920 contained and that it actually is big enough to release all the heat and smoke from so you would 02:25:37.920 --> 02:25:43.760 you would never make that consideration until you number one said is this a safe decision 02:25:44.640 --> 02:25:50.800 correct thank you so that doesn't even come into consideration yeah the first thing is before we 02:25:50.800 --> 02:25:57.120 would get on the roof and actually cut a hole is is it going to be safe that's what i needed 02:25:57.120 --> 02:26:04.880 thank you yes sir from i think from my experience and at this in this place that's partially the 02:26:04.880 --> 02:26:10.720 cutting the hole is the safe is dealing with the safety of the firefighters as much as it is 02:26:11.760 --> 02:26:16.400 anything else i mean you don't cut the hole and let's because except for the fact that it makes 02:26:16.400 --> 02:26:23.040 the fire safer for the firefighters if i remember correctly from my other opportunities to have here 02:26:23.040 --> 02:26:32.880 so all right other questions of fire i have none so just on i guess just because um 02:26:32.880 --> 02:26:40.080 so logically we would we would work on the safety right we'd make sure that it was safe 02:26:40.080 --> 02:26:45.840 that's a logical that should be ingrained that you know obviously you're not going to go into 02:26:45.840 --> 02:26:51.440 something knowing or expecting that you're going to get hurt but on that page 259 without reference 02:26:51.440 --> 02:26:56.720 to safety on top of that page it does say that that it's it's exactly the first step in making 02:26:56.720 --> 02:27:04.480 any ventilation opening and it i mean it even says the first step is to locate the proper site so i'm 02:27:04.480 --> 02:27:08.480 just learning that out there does that change anything for anyone i know that the question here 02:27:08.480 --> 02:27:14.800 is what is the primary concern in roof ventilation so because it's talking about roof ventilation 02:27:14.800 --> 02:27:16.960 specifically we would not say that it's the 02:27:16.960 --> 02:27:23.840 locating the proper site locating that where the proper opening should be 02:27:34.080 --> 02:27:38.880 geeskipper i was wondering if that was for me or is that for y'all to discuss amongst yourselves 02:27:38.880 --> 02:27:48.800 no i anyone that would help me understand sure so um the to i'm trying to phrase this is not an opinion 02:27:48.800 --> 02:27:57.280 getting on a roof to getting on a roof to cut a hole is one of the most unsafe things that we can 02:27:57.280 --> 02:28:03.440 do if there's a fire underneath this so we have to really carefully look at that roof and consider 02:28:03.440 --> 02:28:08.480 the sagging of the you know the the decking that kind of thing we sound the roof when we get on 02:28:08.480 --> 02:28:14.320 there if we get on top we start hitting it with um holes and determine if it's soft before we 02:28:14.320 --> 02:28:20.800 actually put our weight on a roof and that's all in regards to the safety of it but the actual act 02:28:20.800 --> 02:28:26.080 of cutting a roof which this is this is talking about roof ventilation which is all that stuff 02:28:26.080 --> 02:28:31.840 combined but the act of actually cutting the hole okay yes this is safe i got to where now where do 02:28:31.840 --> 02:28:37.920 i want to go now i'm going to cut a roof that might be the first step in that act of cutting a roof 02:28:37.920 --> 02:28:43.680 but the whole ventilation of roof ventilation can bind together we have to consider safety first in 02:28:43.680 --> 02:28:48.800 all of that i understand i guess i'm just trying to i'm trying to differentiate with what the book 02:28:48.800 --> 02:28:53.200 says with what your common knowledge says by experience so your common knowledge by experience 02:28:53.200 --> 02:28:57.440 is you have to make sure that it's safe you have to take all those other things into consideration 02:28:57.440 --> 02:29:03.440 but yes from the book and it's talking just about the vent so the first step in making any 02:29:03.440 --> 02:29:08.640 ventilation opening is to locate the proper site usually as close directly over the fire i mean 02:29:08.640 --> 02:29:14.000 this this is what it sounds like to me if i'm i know all those other things i know you'll have 02:29:14.000 --> 02:29:18.800 to take those into consideration but just like in the past i'm not i'm not necessarily or we 02:29:18.800 --> 02:29:22.640 haven't necessarily been talking about experience we're talking about what's stated in the book 02:29:23.440 --> 02:29:31.920 so i mean i'm i'm but in the book it clearly states in the second column as my as the 02:29:31.920 --> 02:29:38.240 departmental response says the second column about four lines down that the safety of the members 02:29:38.240 --> 02:29:45.280 performing the task is always the first concern right that's on page 371 but on page 259 02:29:45.280 --> 02:29:51.760 it's saying something so i'm just looking at his appeal and he's making a valid point to me 02:29:53.200 --> 02:30:02.400 well the the one thing on 259 it says and i'm reading from what exactly what you were saying 02:30:02.400 --> 02:30:11.280 except that you left out two words and that is is safe usually as close to directly over the fire 02:30:11.280 --> 02:30:21.520 as is safe so safety still comes into play even on 259 therefore safety still keep i mean there's 02:30:21.520 --> 02:30:28.400 safety twice so i think again i think safety is is the primary concern doesn't say just go up and 02:30:28.400 --> 02:30:33.760 cut a hole so it's location where it's safe right but you're using your you're using your common 02:30:33.760 --> 02:30:38.480 knowledge so i'm using what's in the book you're using i'm using what's right here in the book 02:30:38.480 --> 02:30:49.280 says it's safe when you read that when you read the sentence off of 259 you left the two words is 02:30:49.280 --> 02:30:54.400 no i know out of your reading and so no i know i know what i know what it's saying but it's still 02:30:54.400 --> 02:30:58.880 talking about well yeah obviously you're not going to cut it you're going to determine what's safe to 02:30:58.880 --> 02:31:09.040 determine where where the proper site would be to cut so safety still becomes the best answer 02:31:12.800 --> 02:31:20.080 i don't know i mean i i i mean i would make a motion that we accept both 02:31:20.080 --> 02:31:28.960 dandy okay hang on one second you can make that i i you but i'm sorry are you asking for something 02:31:28.960 --> 02:31:34.560 else yeah first i have to is there anyone like to speak in opposition to the to the appeal 02:31:36.240 --> 02:31:46.880 mr pruett yes thank you thank you very much commissioner prada i believe if we read the 02:31:46.880 --> 02:31:56.160 very next sentence on page 259 it's in parentheses and it says note for this text whenever i refer to 02:31:56.160 --> 02:32:03.840 directly over the fire i mean as close to that area as is safely possible considering the 02:32:03.840 --> 02:32:11.200 conditions of the roof the danger of collapse and other such factors so i think the author is 02:32:11.200 --> 02:32:20.400 addressing safety in making that first step of the ventilation opening to locate the proper site you 02:32:20.400 --> 02:32:25.920 can't locate the site unless it's safe to get on the roof and and he's reiterating that fact 02:32:27.360 --> 02:32:36.960 and i hope hopefully i explain that to you no i agree i agree i'm trying to i'm trying to 02:32:36.960 --> 02:32:44.320 differentiate between what i see is written and between what you know my experience yes and that's 02:32:44.320 --> 02:32:50.320 why i brought up that second sentence on page 259 because the author is saying you you have to be 02:32:50.320 --> 02:32:59.520 safe before you decide where to cut that hole you're welcome okay anyone else like to speak 02:32:59.520 --> 02:33:09.280 in opposition to the appeal now we can entertain a motion on question 58 02:33:18.480 --> 02:33:22.080 do you ask for the motion yes i'll still motion that we accept b and d 02:33:22.080 --> 02:33:28.560 oh i'll second 02:33:28.560 --> 02:33:35.840 okay motion is to accept b and d 02:33:35.840 --> 02:33:39.440 discussion 02:33:43.440 --> 02:33:52.480 now now i realize that i could have uh allow the motion to die for lack of a second and i 02:33:52.480 --> 02:33:58.320 didn't do that because i wanted to make sure we had the opportunity to discuss any more things 02:33:58.320 --> 02:34:07.280 but i do feel that um the um the safety is the primary issue for me rather than the location 02:34:13.440 --> 02:34:21.840 okay all in the motion any any other discussion motion on the floor is to accept b and d 02:34:21.840 --> 02:34:25.920 all in favor of that motion say aye 02:34:25.920 --> 02:34:34.480 all opposed aye motion fails 02:34:36.800 --> 02:34:44.080 i would entertain a alternative and alternative motion i make the motion that we sustain the key 02:34:44.080 --> 02:34:46.880 and i'll second it 02:34:46.880 --> 02:34:51.600 any discussion 02:34:51.600 --> 02:34:59.840 all in favor say aye opposed 02:35:06.800 --> 02:35:15.280 okay motion carries two to one next question is 67 02:35:15.280 --> 02:35:22.800 and the appellant is 02:35:22.800 --> 02:35:31.440 mr small and he's not here so i'm reading the appeal to okay um 02:35:33.200 --> 02:35:40.320 question 67 says some of the most dangerous multiple dwellings to operate in operate in 02:35:40.320 --> 02:35:49.520 during fire conditions are buildings blank answers to fill in that are with one or with more than one 02:35:49.520 --> 02:35:59.200 open stairway b which have been renovated c with only one window per room d which have eight foot 02:35:59.200 --> 02:36:09.600 ceilings the keyed answer is b which have been renovated the appellant says that quite that 02:36:09.600 --> 02:36:17.120 answer a with more than one open stairway should be an alternative or in another answer 02:36:19.120 --> 02:36:30.240 and again we're in the handbook of tactics page 400 well the the appellant says 400 02:36:32.400 --> 02:36:53.920 and the the question comes from 391 so the um the appellant the appeal reads 02:36:53.920 --> 02:37:02.000 if i can read it uh page 400 spends the whole page talking about how dangerous open stairways 02:37:02.000 --> 02:37:09.040 are this is in the same chapter as the question was taken from question involves a single paragraph 02:37:09.040 --> 02:37:15.680 although the all through the book the author talks about how dangerous open stairways are 02:37:15.680 --> 02:37:18.240 uh says that there are 02:37:18.240 --> 02:37:27.440 chimneys and the main exposure to protect uh the most serious situations are usually 02:37:27.440 --> 02:37:35.920 encountered at fires in the down apartment is that right down apartment because the 02:37:35.920 --> 02:37:43.520 chairs the stairs are the equipment are the equivalent of a cellar stair going down 02:37:43.520 --> 02:37:51.120 are also a pic mentioned opening staircases on this page one paragraph about renovating buildings 02:37:51.120 --> 02:37:56.560 question lacks detail to answer the question i didn't read that very well but basically 02:37:58.400 --> 02:38:10.320 saying that about open stairways is the um should also be included so um fire response 02:38:10.320 --> 02:38:19.920 to sustain the key verbatim in the book the answer is clear in the book at the top of the second 02:38:19.920 --> 02:38:25.440 column answer a is stated as an option in the appeal is not correct the appeal refers to the 02:38:25.440 --> 02:38:29.520 section of the book where it talks about the dangers of single open stairway going up or down 02:38:29.520 --> 02:38:35.440 to a floor answer a states with more than one open stairway having multiple open stairways 02:38:35.440 --> 02:38:40.720 to any given force gives victims more than one way out it also gives a primary path one of the 02:38:40.720 --> 02:38:44.880 stairways for the heat and smoke to travel thus making additional stairways more tenable 02:38:44.880 --> 02:38:50.880 questions of fire 02:38:55.440 --> 02:39:05.840 uh 02:39:05.840 --> 02:39:19.840 is there any instance in which um the appellant's concerns are validated 02:39:26.400 --> 02:39:30.800 i would not disagree with the fact that open stairways can be dangerous 02:39:30.800 --> 02:39:41.840 can be but it's not the most dangerous no 02:39:56.000 --> 02:40:01.840 are the questions of fire 02:40:01.840 --> 02:40:11.840 anyone like to speak in opposition to the appeal 02:40:11.840 --> 02:40:17.200 seeing no one 02:40:17.200 --> 02:40:22.080 commissioners i would entertain a motion 02:40:24.480 --> 02:40:26.960 i'll make the motion that we sustain the key 02:40:26.960 --> 02:40:33.120 one second any discussion 02:40:33.120 --> 02:40:42.640 no discussion for me all in favor of sustaining the key for 67 say aye aye 02:40:42.640 --> 02:40:49.440 okay next is question 68 02:40:54.480 --> 02:41:04.640 okay we have two appeals 02:41:04.640 --> 02:41:18.640 question is 417 02:41:24.640 --> 02:41:30.960 okay question says taxpayers may be broken down into two general classes new style and old style 02:41:30.960 --> 02:41:38.880 the older style style taxpayer a are generally three to four floors in height 02:41:38.880 --> 02:41:50.160 b has a tremendous amount of combustible materials in his construction c is always one floor in height 02:41:50.160 --> 02:41:58.160 and d has become the most hazardous building for firefighters to operate in and we have 02:41:58.160 --> 02:42:13.280 two appeals um mr miller i'll let you go first since since i don't want to read it unless i have 02:42:13.280 --> 02:42:24.480 to okay um on this appeal if we uh look to the top of page 415 which is chapter 16 02:42:24.480 --> 02:42:33.920 we see that the title is store fires slash taxpayers and strip malls so defining store 02:42:33.920 --> 02:42:44.080 fires as taxpayers we'll see that in the text and if you'll flip over to 416 at the bottom of the 02:42:44.080 --> 02:42:50.880 page left hand side we read there's an italicized taxpayer word it says the term used to describe a 02:42:50.880 --> 02:42:57.520 row of stores and other occupancies such as local pizza parlor chinese food housed under a single 02:42:57.520 --> 02:43:05.600 roof um although not recognized in any building code this description has come to be accepted 02:43:05.600 --> 02:43:13.040 by the fire service as any multi-store commercial structure described previously that is built of 02:43:13.040 --> 02:43:18.800 class three ordinary construction my point is multi-store commercial structure that's what a 02:43:18.800 --> 02:43:26.400 taxpayer is um if we go back to the test question where they pulled the question was from 417 02:43:26.400 --> 02:43:33.360 underneath styles of taxpayers it does call out new and old style and then the answer says old 02:43:33.360 --> 02:43:40.480 style taxpayers have tremendous amount of combustible material in its construction i agree with that 02:43:40.480 --> 02:43:47.840 it's right there but the effect of that is all that is written in those first two pages and the 02:43:47.840 --> 02:43:57.200 entire chapter it talks about store buyers and taxpayers and just to single out old style if you 02:43:57.200 --> 02:44:05.200 look at the figure six dash two where the old cars are there it says uh old taxpayers often hold as 02:44:05.200 --> 02:44:14.000 many as 20 stores under one roof so taxpayers and stores are used up in the same way old tack if 02:44:14.000 --> 02:44:19.920 there's a taxpayer buyer it's a store buyer and you can see that in the picture so if we look at 02:44:19.920 --> 02:44:30.240 the graph at the top of page 416 it clearly shows uh 16.6 firefighters are killed for 100 000 buyers 02:44:30.240 --> 02:44:37.120 and that's the highest amount of firefighters that are killed amongst those uh four occupancy 02:44:37.120 --> 02:44:42.800 classifications or types of structures that that bar graph shows and that substantiates my answer 02:44:43.520 --> 02:44:48.000 of them being the most hazardous i think that's what the answer was i'm something like that i 02:44:48.000 --> 02:44:53.280 don't have those but i tried to remember what you read that is the most hazardous for firefighters 02:44:53.280 --> 02:45:00.080 to fight that store fires kill more and even in the text it says four times more than residential 02:45:00.080 --> 02:45:06.880 and it also lays out four different types of structures there so i would say it's even the 02:45:06.880 --> 02:45:11.280 best answer due to safety if you looked at all those answers you said which one's going to keep 02:45:11.280 --> 02:45:16.960 us safe it's going to be the answer that tells you that's the most hazardous store most hazardous 02:45:16.960 --> 02:45:21.680 place to work is on a store fire because it kills more people i would say it's even a better answer 02:45:21.680 --> 02:45:35.680 than what we have key okay thank you sir um mr small says most dangerous buildings are taxpayers 02:45:36.400 --> 02:45:45.840 many are both string uh which the page in question the page the question is on references 02:45:45.840 --> 02:45:51.280 that they are the most dangerous it also has a picture a pic of a fire where firefighters died 02:45:51.840 --> 02:46:09.600 answer d is talked about on the page in multiple places i response oh i'm sorry questions of the 02:46:09.600 --> 02:46:18.560 appellant got ahead of myself that is there an instance where it specifically says 02:46:20.000 --> 02:46:28.320 the answer that she gave that it's the most hazardous to operate in he's referencing figure 16 1 02:46:28.320 --> 02:46:40.640 on page 4 16 i see 16 1 i was just looking for the specific terminology i'm sorry 02:46:42.480 --> 02:46:51.840 i had a question so can can stores be considered um new style can someone build a new commercial 02:46:51.840 --> 02:46:58.560 development and it be considered new style as well or does it always have to be the old style 02:46:58.560 --> 02:47:02.080 i'm thinking of all these you know things that are popping up all over the place around teasley 02:47:02.080 --> 02:47:10.800 they meet your requirement that says you know pizza parlor chinese food like all the multiple 02:47:10.800 --> 02:47:13.920 occupancy whatever can those be considered new style 02:47:13.920 --> 02:47:26.080 sir class three construction yes ma'am okay so okay then that kind of for me that kind of 02:47:26.080 --> 02:47:28.160 takes away the connection that you're making 02:47:28.160 --> 02:47:37.760 okay i the uh excerpt under the graph bar graph up there just talks about commercial buildings 02:47:37.760 --> 02:47:44.560 four times more deadly to firefighters and residential so i just pointed out old style 02:47:44.560 --> 02:47:50.000 just because that's what that's what the answer was i'm including it in all of it i mean because 02:47:50.000 --> 02:47:55.760 the bar graph doesn't call out old style i just wanted to point out that if i don't know what 02:47:55.760 --> 02:48:00.320 the department's going to say and if they tried to weed me out by pointing just the older style i 02:48:00.320 --> 02:48:05.680 wanted to make that connection but i'm not singling it out because it does include new and old saw 02:48:05.680 --> 02:48:12.880 because taxpayers is both right taxpayers both but i guess because the question says the older 02:48:12.880 --> 02:48:19.200 style taxpayer you have to make a connection only with that older style taxpayer i get what you're 02:48:19.200 --> 02:48:23.600 saying all right thank you 02:48:23.600 --> 02:48:28.240 any other questions 02:48:30.960 --> 02:48:37.600 okay fire response but to sustain the key the answer is clearly stated in the book 02:48:37.600 --> 02:48:42.560 the book does not state that they are the most hazardous buildings as stated in answer d making 02:48:42.560 --> 02:48:53.040 this answer false questions of fire okay even though it doesn't state that it's the most 02:48:53.040 --> 02:49:06.320 hazardous is it the most hazardous type of building is that where most of your hazards are 02:49:06.320 --> 02:49:16.880 no may i may i so my i i'm thinking through this too so they're saying the older style 02:49:16.880 --> 02:49:21.200 taxpayer has become the most hazardous building but that's not what it's saying it's saying that 02:49:21.200 --> 02:49:28.000 the that the stores are the most hazard buildings and under storage you can have new style and old 02:49:28.000 --> 02:49:37.600 style i think that's the correct response there commissioner that the question actually asked 02:49:37.600 --> 02:49:42.880 for the distinction between the new style and old style and to say that commercial structures 02:49:42.880 --> 02:49:49.440 are the most dangerous i would concede that point however it's trying to make a distinction 02:49:49.440 --> 02:49:56.480 between two styles of taxpayers not that doesn't include super stores or or malls or you know all 02:49:56.480 --> 02:50:01.920 these other commercial occupancies that would be included in that big global term commercial 02:50:01.920 --> 02:50:11.760 occupancy it's asking specifically about old style taxpayers well the one thing that i haven't heard 02:50:11.760 --> 02:50:19.440 us mentioned i haven't heard us in the discussion is the amount of combustible materials in the 02:50:19.440 --> 02:50:30.160 construction doesn't why does an old old style taxpayer is it is it because of what the materials 02:50:30.160 --> 02:50:36.480 are because they're old style they had different materials and rather than the new styles which 02:50:36.480 --> 02:50:43.840 makes may or may not make them more hazardous but is the materials the the fire suggested answer or 02:50:43.840 --> 02:50:50.880 the text text test writers answer is has a tremendous amount of combustible material 02:50:50.880 --> 02:50:56.640 so address that aspect of it if you will please chief skipper so you can say old style construction 02:50:56.640 --> 02:51:02.080 is mostly wood framed it's going to have especially class three is going to be a masonry exterior or 02:51:02.080 --> 02:51:08.240 masonry walls and then all the framing would be done with wood and then new style would be like 02:51:08.240 --> 02:51:12.960 aluminum studs that you see sometimes these metal you know that they have a masonry or brick veneer 02:51:12.960 --> 02:51:19.520 exterior and then the actual framing of the structure is going to be out of some sort of 02:51:19.520 --> 02:51:26.320 metal component and it doesn't have to be a wooden frame so there's inherently going to be more 02:51:26.320 --> 02:51:42.320 combustibles in the framing and the building of an old style taxpayer so that makes them less hazardous 02:51:42.320 --> 02:51:44.240 yeah 02:51:44.240 --> 02:51:55.520 i don't i'm not going to say it makes it less or more hazardous it doesn't make them 02:51:55.520 --> 02:52:01.280 the most hazardous i don't think you can draw that line and say that with 02:52:01.280 --> 02:52:07.840 any sort of study that would support that statement or the text from the book 02:52:07.840 --> 02:52:22.240 okay mr miller yes sir um on page 418 in the second column that first paragraph 02:52:22.960 --> 02:52:30.000 it reads newer style taxpayers face some same dangers of fire spread through the cock lock 02:52:30.000 --> 02:52:38.080 as older ones do in addition there's a likely problem of early collapse of unprotected steel 02:52:38.080 --> 02:52:42.640 route so if we're trying to draw a distinction between one being safer than the other that's 02:52:42.640 --> 02:52:48.240 just not the case and i would say that's why in the bar graph there it didn't make that distinction 02:52:48.240 --> 02:52:54.880 either we're talking about complete newer and older all taxpayers are grouping there 02:52:54.880 --> 02:53:03.440 i just wanted to point that out that that construction is just as dangerous according to the text 02:53:03.440 --> 02:53:07.600 the new style is just as dangerous 02:53:07.600 --> 02:53:15.120 yes on 418 it talks about the some of the they're faced with the same dangers of fire spread through 02:53:15.120 --> 02:53:21.200 the cock lock that they they have a common attic all the way across because of the because of that 02:53:21.200 --> 02:53:28.160 material it can collapse even earlier so then so then d would be wrong then because um your 02:53:28.160 --> 02:53:32.880 question you're saying the older style taxpayer has become the most hazardous so you just proved 02:53:32.880 --> 02:53:38.880 your you just proved the opposite that you're saying that both new style new style can collapse 02:53:38.880 --> 02:53:48.400 even faster i mean did i understand that wrong no you probably did i'm just trying to make 02:53:48.400 --> 02:53:55.600 i don't the the bar graph doesn't do does not divide them up and 02:53:55.600 --> 02:54:04.160 but the reason that this it talks about this the chapter is named store fires taxpayers and strip 02:54:04.160 --> 02:54:09.920 malls and it talks about this for three pages and the question is this one excerpt of older style 02:54:09.920 --> 02:54:18.640 taxpayers so what i'm saying is that combustible construction leads to answer d also being correct 02:54:18.640 --> 02:54:24.240 the store fires are most hazardous it says fire fighters store fires or fire killers is the first 02:54:24.240 --> 02:54:31.920 sentence four times more likely to kill so b leads to d being correct right b leads to d being also 02:54:31.920 --> 02:54:37.920 correct but b is the best answer yes ma'am i say it's the best answer because of the safety factor 02:54:37.920 --> 02:54:43.200 you have to know this and the text speaks more to that than it does combustible construction okay 02:54:43.200 --> 02:54:52.320 would anyone like to speak in opposition to the appeal 02:54:59.840 --> 02:55:03.840 oh there you are yes sir be sure and unmute yourself 02:55:03.840 --> 02:55:11.520 morning clint stevenson um i i'm not sure that i even know what the question is anymore 02:55:11.520 --> 02:55:17.840 can can we reread the question and the answer choices so that and then i'm going to try to 02:55:17.840 --> 02:55:25.200 walk through all those answer choices for you if i can i can find if i can find the question 02:55:25.920 --> 02:55:32.640 i can read the question okay it says taxpayers may be broken down into two general classes 02:55:32.640 --> 02:55:39.600 new style and old style the older style taxpayer blank that's the question 02:55:39.600 --> 02:55:48.400 so the older style taxpayer are generally three to four floors in height the older style taxpayer 02:55:48.400 --> 02:55:54.880 has a tremendous amount of combustible material in its construction the older style taxpayer is 02:55:54.880 --> 02:56:00.800 always one floor in height the older style taxpayer has become the most hazardous building for 02:56:00.800 --> 02:56:13.040 firefighters to operate in so if i okay so really my my thing is if you read it that way the older 02:56:13.040 --> 02:56:17.840 style taxpayer has become the most hazardous building for firefighters to operate in that is 02:56:17.840 --> 02:56:23.920 a false statement the only true statement there is the older style taxpayer has a tremendous amount 02:56:23.920 --> 02:56:28.960 of combustible material in its construction and that is directly quoted from the left agreed 02:56:28.960 --> 02:56:34.240 that's the answer that they're looking for right i mean that's the key to answer 02:56:34.240 --> 02:56:42.960 yes correct i mean you can make a lot of things inclusive draw enough parallels but i i just don't 02:56:42.960 --> 02:56:47.200 think the test question supports any of those answers that's all i've got i just couldn't 02:56:47.200 --> 02:56:53.680 remember what we were talking about yeah are you open for a motion or are we still discussing 02:56:54.160 --> 02:56:59.680 i think we're ready i think we're ready for a motion now okay i'll mention that we sustain the 02:56:59.680 --> 02:57:01.760 key i'll second 02:57:01.760 --> 02:57:08.400 moved and seconded to sustain the key any discussion 02:57:08.400 --> 02:57:17.760 uh yes by by taking the time to go through items on page 418 helped me to make that decision 02:57:17.760 --> 02:57:26.160 so thank you for doing that okay ready to vote ready to vote all in favor of sustaining the key 02:57:26.160 --> 02:57:56.000 of 68 say aye opposed question 69 and we have three appeals okay sorry okay let's go with 02:57:56.000 --> 02:58:02.800 mr pruett we haven't seen heard it from him in a while so yes sir you can go first thank you very 02:58:02.800 --> 02:58:10.640 much other than what i turned in on the written appeal the only thing i would add three things 02:58:10.640 --> 02:58:19.680 that we have to consider the author the test maker and the test taker the author gave us one 02:58:19.680 --> 02:58:28.960 definition on page 155 and by the time he got to page 456 he forgot about that and included a 02:58:28.960 --> 02:58:37.760 second definition that is a little bit broader possibly and so when we moved to the test maker 02:58:37.760 --> 02:58:46.480 he skipped over page 155 to begin with and only wrote the test based on page 456 02:58:47.600 --> 02:58:56.560 so now we move to the text test taker that's all of us sitting before you virtually and um for me 02:58:56.560 --> 02:59:07.760 my recollection of the memorized material stopped at page 155 so that's why i'm asking you to approve 02:59:07.760 --> 02:59:29.920 and allow both answers from both pages 155 and 456 and you're saying c correct you're saying 02:59:29.920 --> 02:59:36.160 another answer c is also correct i believe that's what's on my okay yes that's correct just checking 02:59:36.160 --> 02:59:40.400 yes all right mr johnson i'm going to go to you next 02:59:40.400 --> 02:59:47.760 all right thank you uh to start with can i have you read the question please 02:59:47.760 --> 02:59:58.160 considering high-rise fires it has been said the longer the reflex time is 02:59:58.160 --> 03:00:07.440 the larger the fire you're likely to face reflex time is a the amount of time it takes to board 03:00:07.440 --> 03:00:16.160 apparatus respond to the building and enter the building with proper equipment b response time 03:00:16.160 --> 03:00:23.600 hose laying time and fire control time c the amount of time to respond and get to the fire 03:00:23.600 --> 03:00:31.600 location and d elapsed time from receipt of the alarm until an effective stream is flowing on the 03:00:31.600 --> 03:00:39.600 fire the keyed answer is d elapsed time from the receipt of the alarm until the effective 03:00:39.600 --> 03:00:48.160 stream is flowing flowing on the fire okay thank you i'm with mr pruitt on this the book specifically 03:00:48.160 --> 03:00:54.320 has two different definitions that are called out on the different pages one on page 155 like 03:00:54.320 --> 03:01:01.280 he talked about in the other on page 456 the one on 456 is kind of an all-encompassing thing it says 03:01:01.280 --> 03:01:05.760 reflex time is a total time elapsed from receipt of the alarm until an effective stream is flowing 03:01:05.760 --> 03:01:13.200 on the fire however on page 155 the part about an effective stream flowing on the fire is not there 03:01:13.920 --> 03:01:18.560 we're left with two different definitions in the book and the source material 03:01:18.560 --> 03:01:26.640 so i believe the answer a in addition to what they're saying c and then in addition to what 03:01:26.640 --> 03:01:34.160 the test was keyed as d are all correct applicable answers a says the amount of time it takes to 03:01:34.160 --> 03:01:39.040 board the apparatus respond to the building and enter the building with proper equipment that's 03:01:39.040 --> 03:01:43.200 what i think should be an answer also the reason i say that is because all of those things are 03:01:43.200 --> 03:01:51.280 included in the definition on one 456 the total definition given for reflex time but then also on 03:01:51.280 --> 03:01:57.040 the definition on 155 leaves out the flowing of an effective fire stream so we're left with these two 03:01:57.040 --> 03:02:01.520 different definitions and we have to do our best to consolidate these two definitions into something 03:02:01.520 --> 03:02:06.640 that makes sense to us that matches with what's on the test all of these answers that have been 03:02:06.640 --> 03:02:15.280 discussed are appropriate answers when given that dilemma okay 03:02:15.280 --> 03:02:20.080 mr pazano 03:02:20.080 --> 03:02:23.760 you thought i forgot about you didn't you 03:02:23.760 --> 03:02:32.960 um pretty much the same um argument that i think was made by mr prude uh the definition comes from 03:02:32.960 --> 03:02:44.640 page 456 and um and i my appeal is to um have answer c also added to correct answers um the 03:02:44.640 --> 03:02:50.480 definition is on 456 uh reflex time total time elapsed from the receipt of the alarm until 03:02:50.480 --> 03:02:56.960 effective stream is flowing on the fire and it includes response and setup time and then again 03:02:56.960 --> 03:03:12.640 we turn to 155 and and it and it just reiterates that okay thank you question of the appellants 03:03:18.640 --> 03:03:31.440 i have a question uh mr johnson and point me specifically to where your your 03:03:31.440 --> 03:03:39.360 your answer a the amount of time it takes to board apparatus respond to the fire and 03:03:39.360 --> 03:03:46.320 enter the building with proper equipment um where where is your justification coming from again 03:03:49.200 --> 03:03:55.760 all right if you look at the definition on page 456 it says reflex time is the total time elapsed 03:03:55.760 --> 03:04:01.120 from the receipt of the alarm so you receive an alarm to fire station that's answer d 03:04:01.120 --> 03:04:09.920 that's answer d right i'm okay i'm trying to give my justification okay so it's the time it takes 03:04:09.920 --> 03:04:14.240 to board the apparatus once you receive that alarm that is after the receipt so that falls 03:04:14.240 --> 03:04:20.080 within the parameters of the definition on page 456 you have to also respond to the building 03:04:20.080 --> 03:04:25.440 and enter the building with the proper equipment that also falls within the parameters of the 03:04:25.440 --> 03:04:32.480 definition on page 456 and that's also reiterated on the definition in the definition from page 155 03:04:33.600 --> 03:04:44.800 so my answer of a that i put all of the stuff within that answer falls in those definitions 03:04:44.800 --> 03:05:03.120 okay any other questions i have a question uh of the department please 03:05:03.120 --> 03:05:11.920 we aren't there yet oh i'm sorry you're so impatient anyone else have questions for the appellant 03:05:11.920 --> 03:05:20.720 all right just so i can understand uh so the says alarm time until effective stream is flowing on 03:05:20.720 --> 03:05:25.440 the fire that does not mean that's when y'all start that's when the stream starts right that's 03:05:25.440 --> 03:05:35.200 not that the fire is under control yet is that right thank you okay fire response um any other 03:05:35.200 --> 03:05:45.840 i'm good okay fire response we suggest you accept answers c and d are the only correct answers answer 03:05:45.840 --> 03:05:51.200 d is correct and is stated directly in the book as stated in two appeals page 155 states that it 03:05:51.200 --> 03:05:57.120 takes to respond to the building and set up operations is very close to answer c answer a 03:05:57.120 --> 03:06:03.920 is not correct because it simply states enter the building it does not refer to setting up 03:06:03.920 --> 03:06:16.640 fire operations or flowing water so your recommendation is to accept c and d yes sir 03:06:21.680 --> 03:06:29.840 okay so here's my here's my devil's advocate on page 155 it says reflex time that it so that is 03:06:29.840 --> 03:06:36.640 um that it takes to respond to the building and set up for operation it doesn't say start the stream 03:06:36.640 --> 03:06:45.920 on 155 that's why we'd voted to accept answer c commissioner it's answer a that we did not accept 03:06:46.480 --> 03:06:51.200 i understand that but i'm making a i'm making an argument that you should accept a because on page 03:06:51.200 --> 03:06:58.080 155 it says that it takes to respond uh that it takes to respond so reflex time that it takes to 03:06:58.080 --> 03:07:02.480 respond to the building and set up for operations you're saying the reason you didn't accept a is 03:07:02.480 --> 03:07:10.960 because this it's only saying entering but it's with proper equipment yes so it excludes the time 03:07:10.960 --> 03:07:15.680 it actually takes to set up that equipment the time it takes for me to get from the first floor 03:07:15.680 --> 03:07:22.240 to the fourth floor tie into the standpipe charge my hose line and actually be set up for fire 03:07:22.240 --> 03:07:32.800 operations is excluded from answer a okay you're saying that didn't see the amount of time to 03:07:32.800 --> 03:07:41.280 respond and get to the fire location yes the fire location is on the fourth floor not at the front 03:07:41.280 --> 03:07:52.560 door to get to the fire location but where's your setup i'm on c commissioner prado go ahead and make 03:07:52.560 --> 03:08:06.000 your recommendation we accept a c and d second just took over my meeting 03:08:06.000 --> 03:08:14.720 and the only reason so the only reason i was saying not b is because b says to the that the 03:08:14.720 --> 03:08:20.560 fire is under control that was my question for does the it was when the big is it when you begin 03:08:21.280 --> 03:08:26.000 when the stream begins or when it's controlled so c b is the only one that shouldn't be accepted i 03:08:26.000 --> 03:08:31.360 make a motion that we accept ac well commissioner we wouldn't open the fire stream at the entry of 03:08:31.360 --> 03:08:36.000 the building we're going to open the fire stream when we get to the fire location it might be it 03:08:36.000 --> 03:08:41.520 might be on the 10th floor so that time it takes a fire company to get to the 10th floor is excluded 03:08:41.520 --> 03:08:53.200 from answer a yeah i think that's splitting hairs i just still make a motion that we accept that's 03:08:53.200 --> 03:08:58.320 that's a lot of time i mean that takes a fire company a lot of time to go from the first floor 03:08:58.320 --> 03:09:03.200 to the 10th floor we're talking possibly five minutes or more 03:09:06.640 --> 03:09:11.680 that it takes to respond to the building and set up for operations 03:09:11.680 --> 03:09:17.120 do you do any setup whenever you get to the whenever you get to the fire and you're on the 03:09:17.120 --> 03:09:21.600 first floor you guys are just pulling up is there any setup that you do downstairs before you go up 03:09:21.600 --> 03:09:25.840 to the 10th floor where the first arriving fire company goes to the fire floor and then they set 03:09:25.840 --> 03:09:30.160 up for fire attack on the fire so there's nothing that you can do on the floor there's nothing that 03:09:30.160 --> 03:09:35.520 you do right when you drive up well we're going to talk we're going to talk to people and stuff 03:09:35.520 --> 03:09:39.760 like that but we're not we're not deploying hose lines or those kinds of we're going to take all 03:09:39.760 --> 03:09:44.800 of our tools and all of our equipment to the fire floor where the actual fire is to actually 03:09:44.800 --> 03:09:46.000 put water on the fire 03:09:46.000 --> 03:09:57.120 i mean the the kind of core concept of this is the fact that it takes all that additional time 03:09:57.120 --> 03:10:01.840 to get to the fire because it is 10 stories up five stories up 03:10:05.920 --> 03:10:10.720 okay so can i have the appellate can you respond to that why are you saying that we should still 03:10:10.720 --> 03:10:17.200 accept a then if now that he's explained that but there's no right when you guys arrive there's no 03:10:17.200 --> 03:10:25.040 setup there so and it does say in the book even on page 155 it is saying that it takes to respond 03:10:25.040 --> 03:10:28.880 to the building and set up for operations and from what i'm understanding there is no setup 03:10:28.880 --> 03:10:34.880 when you drive up there's only setup when you get to the actual place i would love to know 03:10:34.880 --> 03:10:38.560 i would love to respond to that the fire is happening yeah i would love to respond to that 03:10:38.560 --> 03:10:43.040 any high rise uh fire that you pull up to there is going to be set up when you initially pull up on 03:10:43.040 --> 03:10:48.720 that scene how are you going to get water to that stand pipe if you don't have setup time to get 03:10:48.720 --> 03:10:53.840 your hose connected from your engine to that stand pipe to support that sprinkler system there is a 03:10:53.840 --> 03:10:59.200 lot of setup that takes place not only at the fire floor but that also takes place at the ground 03:10:59.200 --> 03:11:03.520 level when you pull up so for him to say there's no setup when you first pull up that's not an 03:11:03.520 --> 03:11:08.720 accurate statement okay so now i think everybody's agreed that we should include c and d so we're 03:11:08.720 --> 03:11:14.000 trying to decide should a be included in that so the amount of time that it takes to board apparatus 03:11:14.000 --> 03:11:21.760 okay respond to the building and enter the building with proper equipment correct but his say he's 03:11:21.760 --> 03:11:28.000 saying that to enter the building with proper equipment i'm still gonna latch on another five 03:11:28.000 --> 03:11:37.040 ten minutes to set up before i before water can start flowing that's right right it depends on 03:11:37.040 --> 03:11:40.720 where the fire is that i understand what he's saying but i also understand that there is setup 03:11:40.720 --> 03:11:44.240 that takes place not only at the ground or fire floor but at the ground floor as well 03:11:44.240 --> 03:11:51.760 so included everything that i told you um that falls within the parameters of that definition 03:11:51.760 --> 03:11:57.600 is involved in answer a it all comes straight out of that definition of reflex time and there is 03:11:57.600 --> 03:12:02.480 setup that takes up once you that uh there is setup that takes place once you pull up on scene 03:12:02.480 --> 03:12:08.800 it's all all there my issue so then if we're talking about setup to enter the building with 03:12:08.800 --> 03:12:12.960 proper equipment i understand that we're gonna need five to more minutes to set up the proper 03:12:12.960 --> 03:12:17.440 equipment that i just took in there but then if i look at c the amount of time to respond 03:12:17.440 --> 03:12:21.600 and get to the fire location there's no there's nothing in there talking about preparation there 03:12:21.600 --> 03:12:26.240 either okay so once you get to that fire location where is the setup time mentioned in answer c 03:12:27.040 --> 03:12:33.200 that's my whole point so if i need to also accept a yeah then you have to connect to a 03:12:33.200 --> 03:12:40.240 stand pipe once you get to the fire floor so they're set up at both both things so i would 03:12:40.240 --> 03:12:45.920 say we either accept a c or d that's one option or we just sustain the key and say d is the only 03:12:45.920 --> 03:12:56.560 correct answer we have emotional um is there anyone love would like to speak in opposition 03:12:57.280 --> 03:12:59.760 to the appeal mr die 03:12:59.760 --> 03:13:10.640 yes sir oh i've just uh there there's obviously one best choice and that's what we were talking 03:13:10.640 --> 03:13:16.000 about earlier even in my field there's always a best choice and d is obviously the best choice 03:13:16.000 --> 03:13:20.720 there's no argument about it those other ones you can you can fluff it how you want but that's not 03:13:20.720 --> 03:13:28.720 the correct answer that that's just my personal opinion that's all here okay mr pruett 03:13:28.720 --> 03:13:38.160 yes thank you if we accept a that means that we can grab all of our equipment and just step 03:13:38.160 --> 03:13:45.280 right inside the door of the fire building and hope that the fire goes out we're not setting up 03:13:45.280 --> 03:13:51.600 getting prepared ready to fight fire we're just okay let's take our equipment in we're done that 03:13:51.600 --> 03:14:00.880 it doesn't work that way and um so that's all i want to say so you see my concern is that then 03:14:00.880 --> 03:14:05.600 then because if you're making that rationale for a then i can make that rationale also for c the 03:14:05.600 --> 03:14:09.120 amount of time to respond and get to the fire location so that means i don't even have to take 03:14:09.120 --> 03:14:14.560 my equipment down i can just get to the location and it's going to go away so so with that rational 03:14:14.560 --> 03:14:20.240 my my thinking is still then why did the department why the department saying that we can accept c and 03:14:20.240 --> 03:14:30.000 d so my only thing is if we're accepting c we accept a or we just say d and not accept the fire 03:14:30.000 --> 03:14:42.240 department's recommendation to accept c and d but my input is this d would probably be my preferred 03:14:42.240 --> 03:14:51.440 choice however if you go to to page 155 you you you have the language there in c but also if you're 03:14:51.440 --> 03:15:00.240 going to do c you have to do a and and that's why i chose a c and d otherwise you just have to go with d 03:15:00.240 --> 03:15:04.480 very good 03:15:11.440 --> 03:15:15.600 okay motion is on the floor is to accept a c and d 03:15:15.600 --> 03:15:20.800 is there any discussion 03:15:20.800 --> 03:15:32.080 yes well the clock starts when the alarm comes in the clock stops when the fire 03:15:32.080 --> 03:15:37.680 start when we start putting out the fire i think d is the only correct answer 03:15:39.280 --> 03:15:44.320 i disagreed with the with the fire response when i when i read this question 03:15:44.320 --> 03:15:53.680 i've done that before but i to me that's the and it includes all of these other things i mean the 03:15:53.680 --> 03:16:00.400 real the the real issue is putting putting water on the fire when the hose is flowing 03:16:00.400 --> 03:16:07.440 and that's where the the stopwatch stops the reflex watch stops when you start putting water 03:16:07.440 --> 03:16:14.160 on the fire whether it's in the front door on the 10th floor or wherever i mean the longer you take 03:16:14.160 --> 03:16:20.000 to get to the 10th floor and get set up the more the fire is is going and that's what happens on 03:16:20.000 --> 03:16:27.760 that's what he's talking about on 55 is you're giving the fire the advantage but we're really 03:16:27.760 --> 03:16:35.360 talking about from beginning to reflex time meaning from the beginning of the of the event 03:16:35.920 --> 03:16:39.840 to the time when we start putting the putting water on the fire so 03:16:39.840 --> 03:16:42.480 in my estimation d is the only correct answer 03:16:42.480 --> 03:16:50.960 call the question okay 03:16:50.960 --> 03:17:00.320 motion on the floor is to accept a c and d all in favor say aye 03:17:01.520 --> 03:17:06.160 aye opposed aye 03:17:06.160 --> 03:17:22.000 motion the the now we accept a c and d for the two to one vote okay next is question 83 03:17:29.280 --> 03:17:35.520 and 03:17:35.520 --> 03:17:38.960 three appellates 03:17:38.960 --> 03:17:54.560 i don't think mr whelan is here mr whelan is here he is not okay uh so we have mr stevenson 03:17:56.720 --> 03:18:03.760 and mr pesano mr stevenson 03:18:03.760 --> 03:18:11.200 thank you uh again i'm gonna follow everybody else's pattern could you all read the question 03:18:11.200 --> 03:18:12.000 for me please 03:18:12.000 --> 03:18:21.200 question 83 says blank are those that fall within management prerogative 03:18:23.840 --> 03:18:33.040 fill in the blank answers are a prohibited subjects b arbitrary subjects c mandatory subjects d 03:18:33.040 --> 03:18:39.760 permissive subjects so again the question says blank are those that fall within management 03:18:39.760 --> 03:18:50.560 prerogative the keyed answer is d permissive subjects okay uh i'm just going to go over my 03:18:50.560 --> 03:18:55.520 written appeal really quickly i think the question itself is not specific enough and 03:18:55.520 --> 03:18:59.840 what it's trying to get the the answer that they have keyed 03:18:59.840 --> 03:19:05.840 the originally keyed answer states that permissive subjects are those that 03:19:05.840 --> 03:19:10.240 fall within a management prerogative the test question eliminates the word typically 03:19:10.240 --> 03:19:13.840 that's used in the source book the use of the word typically implies that permissive subjects 03:19:13.840 --> 03:19:19.280 fall within a management prerogative most of the time but not always it's on the same page 03:19:19.280 --> 03:19:26.320 in the source material as the answer was derived um prohibited subjects which is answer a it says 03:19:26.320 --> 03:19:31.360 management is permitted to unilaterally change a prohibited subject without having to negotiate 03:19:31.360 --> 03:19:39.600 and if you can unilaterally change something it is clearly within your prerogative to change it 03:19:39.600 --> 03:19:46.320 so i know what the answer that they were looking for and if they had just added a couple words to 03:19:46.320 --> 03:19:50.640 the test question they could have gotten it down to that but with the answer or the question the 03:19:50.640 --> 03:19:56.720 way it's written i feel like that both those answers are acceptable answers that's all i've 03:19:56.720 --> 03:20:04.160 got you mean with the addition of the word typically no so if they so if something is 03:20:04.160 --> 03:20:14.720 within your prerogative you may decide or you can absolutely decide so the typically thing that kind 03:20:14.720 --> 03:20:20.640 of i wrote that in the appeal that kind of takes you off topic but i guess what i'm trying to say 03:20:20.640 --> 03:20:26.560 is that if something is a prohibited subject then it is always within their prerogative 03:20:26.560 --> 03:20:29.920 not just typically does that make sense 03:20:29.920 --> 03:20:35.120 and so i think they should accept both answers 03:20:35.120 --> 03:20:42.800 permissive subjects and prohibited subjects because they are always 03:20:43.440 --> 03:20:45.520 both of those are within management prerogative 03:20:45.520 --> 03:21:03.520 okay let's let's go into the other appellants mr pazano 03:21:03.520 --> 03:21:12.320 um i for for my appeal i pretty much um use the same argument that um clint just used 03:21:13.520 --> 03:21:17.200 basically i think the hang up there was the management prerogative 03:21:17.200 --> 03:21:26.240 gives you the idea that um management is permitted to change those um whether they want or 03:21:26.240 --> 03:21:32.320 don't want to and just the paragraph right before it management is permitted to unilaterally change 03:21:32.320 --> 03:21:41.520 a prohibited subject subject and that's why um i my appeal is to accept um the other answer as well 03:21:43.680 --> 03:21:54.240 um okay mr mr whelan's appeal is basically the same thing today page 339 it reads 03:21:54.240 --> 03:22:00.480 management is permitted to unilaterally change a prohibited subject without first having to 03:22:00.480 --> 03:22:06.320 negotiate that is management's prerogative prohibited subjects is one of the answers 03:22:06.320 --> 03:22:08.320 it should be correct in addition to d 03:22:11.680 --> 03:22:18.720 now other questions other questions 03:22:18.720 --> 03:22:32.000 hearing none 03:22:32.000 --> 03:22:37.200 fire response 03:22:39.680 --> 03:22:44.800 but to sustain the key this question must be read carefully the question states blank are those that 03:22:44.800 --> 03:22:49.760 fall within management prerogative fall within the management prerogative is the key to the 03:22:49.760 --> 03:22:55.920 question these four words mean that managing management has the right to negotiate a specific 03:22:55.920 --> 03:23:00.400 subject and they can choose to engage in negotiations or not to engage in negotiations 03:23:00.400 --> 03:23:07.040 for a specific subject answer a is not correct because managed management does not have the right 03:23:07.040 --> 03:23:12.320 to negotiate these subjects even if they wanted to b and c are not even asked to be considered 03:23:12.320 --> 03:23:18.320 answer d is the only correct answer because permissive subjects both sides have the prerogative 03:23:18.320 --> 03:23:24.720 to engage in negotiations or not management and the bargaining unit must both both must agree to 03:23:24.720 --> 03:23:30.000 negotiate on a subject it is also both sides prerogative to say that they do not want to 03:23:30.000 --> 03:23:42.720 negotiate or on specific permissive subjects questions of fire 03:23:42.720 --> 03:23:50.320 could you give me an example of a prohibited subject 03:24:00.960 --> 03:24:03.840 i cannot give you one off the top of my head commissioner without 03:24:03.840 --> 03:24:07.680 knowing for sure so i would i wouldn't want to speculate or miss misspeak 03:24:07.680 --> 03:24:16.720 okay then permissive subjects i didn't tell you that either commissioner this is not my expertise 03:24:16.720 --> 03:24:20.160 an attorney in the house they can tell us 03:24:27.760 --> 03:24:33.600 your attorney shaking her head 03:24:33.600 --> 03:24:41.280 well this one without doing additional research i don't want to um i don't i don't want to speak 03:24:41.280 --> 03:24:45.760 on this one i would have to look into this one because i think it needs to be based on the 03:24:45.760 --> 03:24:55.600 resource test materials that has been provided so okay then i'll i'll i'll put out a uh an sos 03:24:57.520 --> 03:25:04.800 does anybody know what the top are that are considered permissive excuse me uh and then 03:25:04.800 --> 03:25:10.080 those that are considered prohibited i see a hand there i don't think that was a hand to 03:25:10.080 --> 03:25:20.000 answer your question was it clint mine's not but i mean i could probably give you some examples but 03:25:20.000 --> 03:25:24.080 i'd have to have i don't have the book in front of me but i could probably give you some examples 03:25:24.080 --> 03:25:30.800 when it says there's certain things that are legally prohibited from from bargaining and 03:25:30.800 --> 03:25:36.800 those are things that are you know exclusive to management rights like uh for instance if we use 03:25:36.800 --> 03:25:45.520 our fire department um one of the things might be that the battalion chief at his discretion 03:25:45.520 --> 03:25:53.600 can take an apparatus out of service right um for training well that might not be something that is 03:25:53.600 --> 03:25:59.840 that we would bargain about and i'm i'm just throwing that out there because it's within 03:25:59.840 --> 03:26:04.160 manage management's prerogative to decide what the daily staffing is that's not something that 03:26:04.160 --> 03:26:10.720 we negotiate and in our meet and confer contract say that we will have you know 43 people on duty 03:26:10.720 --> 03:26:17.520 every day that's based on what the city has budgeted for how many fte's they have and all that 03:26:19.040 --> 03:26:24.560 so it's more of an economic thing the city has certain exclusive rights that they can change 03:26:24.560 --> 03:26:27.920 and they can make changes without having to negotiate on it 03:26:27.920 --> 03:26:38.400 if you read those top three uh paragraphs just right under the scope of bargaining i mean i think 03:26:38.400 --> 03:26:44.880 that's everything that mr students engine said my thing is is it's to me it's pretty cut and clear 03:26:44.880 --> 03:26:50.160 um where where on page 338 at the very bottom where it talks about prohibited subjects 03:26:50.160 --> 03:26:55.040 prohibited subjects are those that the parties are prohibited from bargaining over 03:26:55.040 --> 03:27:01.520 and bargaining to me just isn't is the same as the management prerogative is it not so if it's 03:27:01.520 --> 03:27:13.520 saying that that they're not even allowed to do that consider a you're on page 339 338 338 excuse 03:27:13.520 --> 03:27:24.960 me okay let me get there can i can i just so the if you read the question and i know that we're i 03:27:24.960 --> 03:27:30.160 feel like we're inferring some things into this because you're reading it in the section in context 03:27:30.160 --> 03:27:36.800 but if you just read the question itself does it mention bargaining or negotiation what is okay what 03:27:36.800 --> 03:27:43.440 is management prerogative what does that define us is that bargain is that not the right to be able to 03:27:43.440 --> 03:27:49.360 bargain without having to go to collective bargaining i would say management prerogative 03:27:49.360 --> 03:27:56.720 would be a decision that management can make right that they're having to go anywhere else so is that 03:27:56.720 --> 03:28:06.400 not the same as the scope of bargaining i guess i'm not clear on what on what you're saying i'm 03:28:06.400 --> 03:28:12.480 saying that bargaining and negotiation are not in the question so you would have to if it the 03:28:12.480 --> 03:28:20.320 question doesn't say as as applies in bargaining or in the on the matter of collective bargaining 03:28:20.320 --> 03:28:25.440 what or whatever that would be one thing but when it doesn't say that and it just says blank 03:28:25.440 --> 03:28:28.560 following in management prerogative 03:28:31.120 --> 03:28:38.800 that would be they can do whatever they want in two areas permissive they can decide to do 03:28:38.800 --> 03:28:46.000 whatever they want and in the uh prohibited they can do whatever they want okay because it's saying 03:28:46.000 --> 03:28:53.360 that it can't so i'm reading it's so on page 339 typically permissive subjects are those that fall 03:28:53.360 --> 03:29:01.280 within a management prerogative management may but is not required to bargain over a permissive 03:29:01.280 --> 03:29:06.960 subject they may but they don't have to however if an agreement is reached so when you're asking me 03:29:06.960 --> 03:29:11.280 where am i getting bargaining that's where i'm getting it from this whole section of permissive 03:29:11.280 --> 03:29:17.840 and prohibitive subjects are is under the subheading of scope of bargaining so am i understanding that 03:29:17.840 --> 03:29:26.480 wrong uh to skipper that to be to fund management prerogative that's giving the management 03:29:26.480 --> 03:29:34.560 the option to bargain yes we have the option to say yes or no and then i would and the more i'm 03:29:34.560 --> 03:29:40.400 thinking about this i would consider a prohibited subject like we don't have the ability to negotiate 03:29:40.400 --> 03:29:47.760 over title seven chapter seven civil rights act you know we don't we can't we can't negotiate with 03:29:47.760 --> 03:29:54.080 the union to say we only want to hire you know women from now on that's a prohibited subject 03:29:54.080 --> 03:30:01.520 right but you are able to on wages hours and other terms of employment which is on page 338 03:30:01.520 --> 03:30:07.200 when it starts to define the scope of bargaining and further down when it talks about prohibited 03:30:07.200 --> 03:30:14.000 subjects these are the subjects that you are not allowed to bargain for any for either side right 03:30:14.000 --> 03:30:20.480 so then how can under management prerogative how can prohibitive subjects fall under management 03:30:20.480 --> 03:30:23.840 prerogative you don't have the management doesn't have the right to bargain under those 03:30:23.840 --> 03:30:31.600 so it cannot a cannot be right so the question the whole umbrella is collective progress 03:30:32.800 --> 03:30:39.600 the scope of bargaining so bargaining versus collective bargaining right this the subject 03:30:39.600 --> 03:30:45.040 excuse me the scope of subjects that may or must be discussed during collective bargaining 03:30:45.040 --> 03:30:53.520 in the public sector is defined initially in the labor relations act and refined by court decisions 03:30:53.520 --> 03:31:02.240 so we're talking collective bargaining here but the question doesn't raise the issue of negotiation 03:31:02.240 --> 03:31:10.880 or bargaining i mean it's simply it's simply asking about the essence the definition 03:31:10.880 --> 03:31:21.040 of which subjects are left to management without negotiation negotiation is not a part of it and 03:31:21.040 --> 03:31:28.640 the only one that's not specifically under negotiation are the permissive subjects 03:31:32.080 --> 03:31:34.000 the others require negotiation 03:31:34.000 --> 03:31:42.080 agreed agreed agreed 03:31:42.080 --> 03:31:54.560 but when you look at the appeals though the appeals are are making a point for 03:31:54.560 --> 03:32:00.400 prohibited subjects yeah but the book clearly states that those are not 03:32:01.120 --> 03:32:05.760 prohibitive subjects are those that parties are prohibited from bargaining over that includes 03:32:05.760 --> 03:32:18.480 management okay so if the book clearly states that a is not an option then we have to go with 03:32:18.480 --> 03:32:31.760 what's there yeah a long way to get here but i'm just trying to make sure that yeah you know man 03:32:31.760 --> 03:32:39.040 motion that we sustain the key i'll second um i need to i need to go one other place first 03:32:39.040 --> 03:32:44.560 then hold that hold that motion um is there anyone like to speak in opposition to the appeal 03:32:48.720 --> 03:32:51.600 mr pruent i know you raised your hand do you have something 03:32:51.600 --> 03:33:00.160 salient and and clear clarifying to say no that was from earlier when someone asked if there were 03:33:00.160 --> 03:33:08.160 any examples okay i thought there were in the book in appendix b but i couldn't find any okay all 03:33:08.160 --> 03:33:13.200 right we just want it we do you raised your hand so we want to acknowledge okay now you can make 03:33:13.200 --> 03:33:19.360 your motion commissioners okay i motion that we sustain the key i'll second 03:33:19.360 --> 03:33:26.720 i hesitantly say is there any discussion 03:33:26.720 --> 03:33:36.480 okay hearing none all in favor of sustaining the key to 83 say aye 03:33:37.600 --> 03:33:46.240 aye you never know when you ask that question anymore all right next is 87 03:33:46.240 --> 03:33:54.880 and there are three appeals is that correct okay 03:33:54.880 --> 03:34:05.440 and none of them are great you got to listen to me read all three of them all right so questions 03:34:05.440 --> 03:34:10.640 the first line of defense against a fire in a building is blank ensuring that the building 03:34:10.640 --> 03:34:18.720 meets proper building specifications b an automatic fire protection system c first responding fire 03:34:18.720 --> 03:34:26.400 department company d completing a thorough and accurate pre-fire plan and building inspection 03:34:26.400 --> 03:34:28.640 um 03:34:31.760 --> 03:34:39.040 all right make sure i'm in it all right one of the one of the appellants says uh the question 03:34:39.040 --> 03:34:46.800 implies all buildings with a says that b is also is the key to answer b is not correct a is the 03:34:46.800 --> 03:34:53.760 correct answer uh the question implies all buildings with a fire in the book it states an automatic 03:34:53.760 --> 03:34:59.920 fire protection system especially an automatic sprinkler system is the first line of defense 03:34:59.920 --> 03:35:06.000 in many buildings does not say all buildings what if the building does not have a sprinkler system 03:35:06.000 --> 03:35:11.840 and it's up to the cons to the construction and specs of the building to be its first line of 03:35:11.840 --> 03:35:22.480 defense another appeal says uh page 23 says automatic fire protection system is the first 03:35:22.480 --> 03:35:28.720 line of defense in many buildings not all all buildings have to meet building specs not all 03:35:28.720 --> 03:35:38.560 buildings have sprinklers installed only about half and wait a minute that's one of that's another 03:35:38.560 --> 03:35:40.480 appeal all right where am i 03:35:40.480 --> 03:35:52.480 okay thank you um not all buildings have fire protection systems my home does not most homes 03:35:52.480 --> 03:35:57.680 do not homes or buildings any of the answers could be correct based on the type of building 03:35:57.680 --> 03:36:04.080 if the question said a building with an automatic automated fire protection system 03:36:04.080 --> 03:36:10.480 then the answer would be b since it is a general building any answer could be correct 03:36:10.480 --> 03:36:16.560 those are the three appeals that have been read in uh fire response 03:36:16.560 --> 03:36:27.440 we chose to accept a and b the question leaves out the keyword many so it is not 100 accurate 03:36:27.920 --> 03:36:31.680 an automatic fire protection system can be anything from a simple smoke detector to a 03:36:31.680 --> 03:36:38.480 fire sprinkler system since b is not 100 correct the argument can be made that a is fairly correct 03:36:38.480 --> 03:36:43.120 also as referenced throughout the chapter c is not mentioned and d while it is mentioned 03:36:43.120 --> 03:36:46.960 in the chapter i think it is a stretch to be considered a first line of defense 03:36:53.600 --> 03:36:58.160 questions commissioners i have no questions 03:36:58.160 --> 03:37:06.240 okay anyone like to speak in opposition to the appeal is that you mr pruett 03:37:06.240 --> 03:37:12.400 yes thank you i don't know if it's in opposition could could you please reread the question 03:37:12.400 --> 03:37:19.200 once again the first line of defense against a fire in a building is 03:37:20.560 --> 03:37:26.400 a ensuring that the building meets proper building specifications b 03:37:26.400 --> 03:37:35.200 an automated fire protection system c the first responding fire department company 03:37:35.200 --> 03:37:42.720 and d completing a thorough and accurate pre-fire plan and building inspection 03:37:45.040 --> 03:37:50.880 thank you very much no further comment 03:37:50.880 --> 03:38:00.880 any other questions commissioner i would in i would entertain a motion 03:38:00.880 --> 03:38:08.320 i move that we accept uh a and b 03:38:12.000 --> 03:38:15.760 one second any discussion 03:38:15.760 --> 03:38:22.800 all in favor say aye aye opposed 03:38:22.800 --> 03:38:32.480 next last is question 92 03:38:35.600 --> 03:38:45.120 on is mr miller there he is yes sir um on this appeal we're in uh 03:38:45.120 --> 03:38:53.840 building construction for the spider service and i wanted to point out um first of all i guess 03:38:53.840 --> 03:38:58.960 if you could just read the question and the answers into the record 03:39:02.720 --> 03:39:09.600 sure which of the following statements is true conceal spaces are permitted between structural 03:39:09.600 --> 03:39:16.560 members in type three construction conceal spaces are permitted between structural members in type 03:39:16.560 --> 03:39:23.120 four construction conceal spaces are permitted between structural members in both type three 03:39:23.120 --> 03:39:31.760 and type four and d conceal spaces are permitted between structural members in neither type three 03:39:31.760 --> 03:39:44.080 nor four construction yes sir uh my answer that the uh there are concealed spaces in type three 03:39:44.080 --> 03:39:52.720 and type four construction um in the book if you'll look at uh page 145 03:39:52.720 --> 03:39:56.800 there's a title called ceilings 03:39:58.720 --> 03:40:04.480 i'll get to why i'm going here first and underneath the bullet points it reads 03:40:04.480 --> 03:40:11.120 ceiling materials can be directly but can be attached directly to the underside of roof joists 03:40:11.120 --> 03:40:18.240 or trusses or they can be installed at a distance beneath the roof supporting roof supports creating 03:40:18.240 --> 03:40:26.720 a considerable concealed space so i just wanted to point out that uh there are they can be the 03:40:26.720 --> 03:40:34.960 ceilings can be attached directly to the trusses or the roof joists which are structural members 03:40:34.960 --> 03:40:42.720 if we'll go now to uh page 206 03:40:42.720 --> 03:40:53.600 there's an information box here it has the purple eye on it and it says heavy timber mill construction 03:40:55.840 --> 03:41:00.960 and rather than just read through the whole thing if we drop down to the last paragraph 03:41:00.960 --> 03:41:08.080 it says the advantages of mill construction can be significantly lessened when a building when a 03:41:08.080 --> 03:41:14.960 mill building undergoes a change of occupancy many older mill style buildings have been converted to 03:41:14.960 --> 03:41:21.680 residential occupancies which results in subdivision of floor space into residential units these 03:41:21.680 --> 03:41:29.360 divisions can be lead to the creation of sealed concealed spaces when partitions and ceilings 03:41:29.360 --> 03:41:34.560 are installed in individual units and that's why i went to ceilings a moment ago because this 03:41:34.560 --> 03:41:40.640 specifically calls out when those are added now you have built spaces and the way that 03:41:40.640 --> 03:41:46.880 the paragraph under ceilings talked about the way it was attached and you directly attach that to a 03:41:47.680 --> 03:41:53.040 floor joist or a structural element now you have a penetration and that's a concealed space 03:41:53.040 --> 03:42:00.880 i do know that i agree with the keyed answer but i believe my answer is correct also based on this 03:42:00.880 --> 03:42:07.120 information box i believe that uh if we look and see why we even have this information box 03:42:07.120 --> 03:42:11.760 on page three at the front of the book it tells us why they even put these in here 03:42:12.960 --> 03:42:20.400 um it says uh information boxes give facts that are complete in themselves but belong 03:42:20.400 --> 03:42:28.480 with the text discussion it is information that needs more emphasis or separation in the text the 03:42:28.480 --> 03:42:33.120 title will give you the change and reflected content but it needs more emphasis so the author 03:42:33.120 --> 03:42:40.480 of the book put this information box in here to give us more emphasis on this type of construction 03:42:40.480 --> 03:42:48.400 and specifically in this box it tells you that concealed spaces are allowed and that exists in 03:42:48.400 --> 03:42:53.440 our city now because a lot of these buildings it says many older mill style buildings because 03:42:53.440 --> 03:42:57.200 those are older they've been renovated a lot of them are residences a lot of them are just uh 03:42:57.200 --> 03:43:03.360 commercial buildings we do have them here in town and we permit for them excuse me so they are 03:43:03.360 --> 03:43:10.400 allowed and we go out and inspect these and when they are renovated those structural members now 03:43:10.400 --> 03:43:15.040 have concealed spaces between them and that's my point for the answer i chose based on the 03:43:15.040 --> 03:43:27.840 information box here so just to be clear you're saying that 03:43:30.480 --> 03:43:36.800 answer a is not then that's the key dancer is not correct but answer c 03:43:36.800 --> 03:43:44.800 i.e. including both type three and type four construction is correct is that is that correct 03:43:44.800 --> 03:43:52.640 i know i went back and forth on how i was going to key this as you can see on my field marked out 03:43:52.640 --> 03:43:58.640 because i didn't know if i'm going to look at this at best answer then what you just said i 03:43:58.640 --> 03:44:04.000 would say yes to because you can't the author doesn't want us walking away from this book 03:44:04.000 --> 03:44:09.680 believing there are no concealed spaces in that type of construction you can't pull up on that 03:44:09.680 --> 03:44:15.600 type of construction recognize it when it says abc apartments outside and think there are no 03:44:15.600 --> 03:44:18.960 concealed spaces in there and the author doesn't want you taking that away from here and that's 03:44:18.960 --> 03:44:24.720 why this information box is in there i believe that answer is actually probably the best answer 03:44:25.440 --> 03:44:31.520 from a safety standpoint we have to know this um i do see where a is in there 03:44:31.520 --> 03:44:39.200 okay other questions for the appellant 03:44:39.200 --> 03:44:47.120 i guess i'm a little confused because on page 49 i mean on the bullet 03:44:47.120 --> 03:44:53.200 under the type four construction it clearly says that they're not permitted 03:44:55.120 --> 03:45:00.560 so i understand what you're saying they do but the book says they're not permitted 03:45:00.560 --> 03:45:09.200 yes ma'am says which of the following statements is true and all of them use the word permitted 03:45:09.200 --> 03:45:17.200 not that they don't exist so this is another this is another example of of your your knowledge that 03:45:17.200 --> 03:45:22.000 you know because you're out there you're living it every day and you see it versus what the book 03:45:22.000 --> 03:45:28.320 says that about without them being permitted question here not about what you do every day 03:45:28.320 --> 03:45:34.560 but but well what the book says yes ma'am i don't see a lot of wiggle room on that 03:45:34.560 --> 03:45:43.360 yes ma'am that's another reason i chose my answer is the only answer is because of that uh it kind 03:45:43.360 --> 03:45:48.560 of there is a little what would appear to be some contradiction it tells you that they're there so 03:45:49.600 --> 03:45:55.840 as the fire prevention and the building department we do permit for renovations and that's when those 03:45:55.840 --> 03:46:01.760 drop ceilings come in as it talks about in this information box we issue permits that allow that 03:46:01.760 --> 03:46:08.160 to happen it's not just uh based on my personal experience that i've described but we do permit 03:46:08.160 --> 03:46:13.440 for this we permit for these type of renovations or remodeling in this type of construction and 03:46:13.440 --> 03:46:22.960 when they do it now you have that concealed space so you guys are doing something because it's not 03:46:22.960 --> 03:46:29.120 permitted to happen that's what i that's why i chose my answer as being the correct one 03:46:29.120 --> 03:46:35.520 and we're going back to you we're going back to what's the source material that we have to look at 03:46:35.520 --> 03:46:40.640 yes ma'am all i read all i just quoted to you was written in this book 03:46:44.320 --> 03:46:49.520 uh our response let's our other questions 03:46:49.520 --> 03:46:57.360 we can come back to we can come back to that too so john i was waiting on fire response 03:46:57.360 --> 03:47:03.280 okay fire response vote to sustain the key the answer is stated in the book 03:47:03.280 --> 03:47:12.400 so uh chief skipper in light of the information that the other officer 03:47:13.200 --> 03:47:18.880 brought forward about that we have some situations that are not permitted but yet they exist 03:47:18.880 --> 03:47:25.280 how do we how do we how do we take that into consideration in preparing for an examination 03:47:25.280 --> 03:47:32.080 like this it's a good question commissioner i don't have any arguments about any of his points made 03:47:34.720 --> 03:47:44.400 right i mean but but i do because you're saying that the answers come from the books 03:47:44.400 --> 03:47:50.640 come from this material not from experience not from background knowledge not from outside source 03:47:50.640 --> 03:47:55.360 material not from other classes that i might have taken at another college that have to do with fire 03:47:55.360 --> 03:47:58.720 it says it has to come just from the book so 03:48:01.840 --> 03:48:08.560 yes ma'am but he was asking he was asking as far as reality that commissioner baines i took that 03:48:08.560 --> 03:48:15.760 question is that but as far as jeb's points i don't have any arguments against him but do i 03:48:15.760 --> 03:48:19.360 say i still stick with sustain the key because that's the answer stated in the book 03:48:19.360 --> 03:48:23.520 as far as the departmental perspective 03:48:27.120 --> 03:48:33.120 i guess my one question to jeb would be this if i was going to build a type four construction 03:48:33.120 --> 03:48:38.560 building from scratch we're not changing occupancy we're not we're not renovating 03:48:38.560 --> 03:48:48.880 would i be permitted to have void spaces permitted to have that as long as it's done correct 03:48:49.840 --> 03:48:59.840 no you wouldn't but the uh the question doesn't draw out if it would have sent new construction 03:48:59.840 --> 03:49:05.760 or in its original form it's an original built time i would agree with the chief that you'd have 03:49:05.760 --> 03:49:10.720 to stop right there but it doesn't say that it leaves it open and that leaves it open to 03:49:10.720 --> 03:49:16.160 what the information box tells us that many of them are renovated and now there's concealed spaces 03:49:16.160 --> 03:49:21.600 if the question would have would have said hey brand new now look at it originally right now 03:49:21.600 --> 03:49:28.800 stop i get what you're saying but it doesn't say that i have a uh this part of the uh in the back 03:49:28.800 --> 03:49:34.240 of the book and definitions i can't find it yet in the book but it has the definition for building 03:49:34.240 --> 03:49:40.400 permit so when i was talking about what we do in the city it's actually in this book uh says uh 03:49:40.400 --> 03:49:45.200 authorization issued from approved authority having jurisdiction before any new construction 03:49:45.200 --> 03:49:50.880 addition renovation operation or demolitions of buildings or structures so that's why i was 03:49:50.880 --> 03:49:56.320 getting uh me seeing and knowing that there's permits issued it actually has it in this book 03:49:56.320 --> 03:50:03.600 no i believe it i just have an issue with y'all are doing something that's probably not best 03:50:03.600 --> 03:50:09.440 practice that's probably number one other two is just the wording it's if what's happened what's 03:50:09.440 --> 03:50:13.840 actually happening but then what in theory is supposed to be the right thing which is that 03:50:13.840 --> 03:50:19.520 they're not supposed to have that they're not supposed to have permitted concealed spaces are 03:50:19.520 --> 03:50:27.440 not permitted uh these structural components for construction i understand i'm just to to make a 03:50:27.440 --> 03:50:33.200 to make the best possible answer i know and what we've been saying all along which is we need to 03:50:33.200 --> 03:50:38.960 follow what's in the source material and to meet with other people's rulings that we've you know 03:50:38.960 --> 03:50:45.760 said yes or no to on on questions that have been appealed today i'm trying to be consistent and to 03:50:45.760 --> 03:50:50.400 look at what's in the book i understand the difference between book and reality i completely 03:50:50.400 --> 03:50:55.840 get that and i know that that's frustrating but just because it happens doesn't mean that it's 03:50:55.840 --> 03:51:02.640 that it's permitted well that's like saying murder is not permitted does it happen of course it does 03:51:02.640 --> 03:51:10.480 in reality is it permitted no it's not permitted exactly in 206 under that information 03:51:10.480 --> 03:51:22.880 section that you cited jeb it says um i can find it now many old old older mill style buildings have 03:51:22.880 --> 03:51:31.440 been converted to residential occupancies which results in the um creation of concealed spaces 03:51:31.440 --> 03:51:39.200 when petitions and ceilings are installed in individual units period end of sentence 03:51:39.200 --> 03:51:43.760 it doesn't bring in 03:51:43.760 --> 03:51:57.760 permitted and that's where so yeah so permission permission to do it is another decision that's 03:51:57.760 --> 03:52:04.240 not talked about in the book the book doesn't talk about permitting concealed spaces in type 03:52:04.240 --> 03:52:10.320 four construction that's what the word converted in order to convert it you have to get a building 03:52:10.320 --> 03:52:15.520 permit and that's where i read the definition in the back where building permit is in this book 03:52:15.520 --> 03:52:23.680 and it talks about renovations and remodels in here and i somewhere in this book it talks about 03:52:24.800 --> 03:52:30.000 building permitting as well i believe it's this one but definitely that definition in the back 03:52:30.000 --> 03:52:33.920 wouldn't be in here if we didn't talk about building permits and that's where they get 03:52:33.920 --> 03:52:45.520 the permission to convert as you just read these occupancies 03:52:50.320 --> 03:52:55.520 i i think that the information that's why the author has that in there so we will know that 03:52:55.520 --> 03:53:00.880 and actually the building the building permit department is where they'll get the permission 03:53:00.880 --> 03:53:10.880 do you think the department would be willing to accept c seen as how you all as a department 03:53:10.880 --> 03:53:16.160 actually do issue these permits the department will not change its stance 03:53:19.200 --> 03:53:20.480 and why do you all issue the permits 03:53:20.480 --> 03:53:30.400 that's for another time mr stevenson did you have a question or comment mr stevenson 03:53:30.400 --> 03:53:37.200 yes sir are we ready to speak in opposition to the appellant yes we're ready for that so the 03:53:37.200 --> 03:53:42.160 only thing i'll say is um real world versus practice obviously two different things 03:53:42.160 --> 03:53:45.760 the whole point of building construction classification is just to 03:53:47.120 --> 03:53:52.880 in these books is to show you the dangers one building versus another building and one of the 03:53:52.880 --> 03:53:58.320 things with the heavy timber construction is is that they don't have concealed spaces 03:53:58.320 --> 03:54:04.160 so that makes them safer whereas the type three buildings they do have concealed spaces so i think 03:54:04.160 --> 03:54:07.440 that's that's where the questions come from that's the answer they're trying to draw out 03:54:07.440 --> 03:54:16.320 i don't permitted meaning not building permit but allowed i think and i think if you 03:54:17.280 --> 03:54:22.240 get a building permit to alter a mill type construction building to something else then 03:54:22.240 --> 03:54:27.600 you no longer have your mill type your mill type four building you have a hybrid building 03:54:27.600 --> 03:54:34.560 now with two different construction types on top of each other i thought that thank you 03:54:34.560 --> 03:54:43.360 can i speak to that sure that's not necessarily true can be but not necessarily 03:54:44.400 --> 03:54:48.000 with drop ceilings you still have the structural elements of that type four building 03:54:48.000 --> 03:54:56.160 regardless of that renovation and on page 15 if there is a section on building permits it 03:54:56.160 --> 03:55:03.600 just tells you that before a permit is issued the proposed design must meet applicable building code 03:55:03.600 --> 03:55:11.280 provisions so they will they will permit this to happen because we permit renovations and that's 03:55:11.280 --> 03:55:18.720 what the information box is getting at converted means renovated or remodeled changing it and they 03:55:18.720 --> 03:55:28.000 have to have permission to do that but a type four building when it's initially built has no concealed 03:55:28.000 --> 03:55:35.120 spaces correct yes sir okay question doesn't stop there 03:55:40.080 --> 03:55:46.640 it's asking you what's true and type three allows it and type four as the information 03:55:46.640 --> 03:55:53.280 box tells us also allows those spaces and legally with building permits it's permitted 03:56:06.720 --> 03:56:11.360 commissioners i would entertain a motion 03:56:11.360 --> 03:56:20.080 my mic not working 03:56:20.080 --> 03:56:26.160 i'll i'll go for it i'll make sure that we accept a and c 03:56:26.160 --> 03:56:30.400 i'll second 03:56:35.600 --> 03:56:37.520 okay discussion 03:56:37.520 --> 03:56:42.080 i have no 03:56:42.080 --> 03:56:59.120 okay ready to vote all in favor the motion is to accept a and c all in favor say aye opposed 03:56:59.760 --> 03:57:06.880 aye motion carries to accept a and c 03:57:06.880 --> 03:57:20.560 ladies and gentlemen we have reached the end of the appointed uh appeals 03:57:20.560 --> 03:57:28.560 um as i said earlier i'm going to say it again uh you guys put in a lot of work 03:57:29.920 --> 03:57:36.480 you put in a lot of work on a daily basis i live out by station six and i hear the 03:57:36.480 --> 03:57:42.160 i hear the ambulance and the fire truck go out a lot so i know you i know you work hard every 03:57:42.160 --> 03:57:49.920 day but you take it upon yourselves to go that extra step and try to memorize all the material 03:57:49.920 --> 03:57:57.360 and a whole bunch of heavy books and um better yourself and be better for our community and 03:57:58.160 --> 03:58:05.040 trust me when i say that we appreciate that you're willing to go that extra mile to do those things 03:58:05.040 --> 03:58:14.880 to make yourself better but also to make us safer that in and of itself says volumes about your 03:58:14.880 --> 03:58:20.800 commitment to the job that you do and i want to thank you for that uh you're you're going in 03:58:20.800 --> 03:58:27.040 places that i wouldn't want to go so uh thank you so much for doing that i hope you will continue 03:58:27.680 --> 03:58:33.200 i know that you may not be happy with us in some ways we're probably not happy with ourselves 03:58:33.200 --> 03:58:40.000 completely either but um it's the process that we go through uh and until we come up with a better 03:58:40.000 --> 03:58:46.960 process which we're going to continually try to do um hence our session in the middle of the meeting 03:58:46.960 --> 03:58:54.800 and subsequent follow-ups to that um we're going to do the best we can do to try to be fair to you 03:58:54.800 --> 03:59:01.680 and give you every benefit of the doubt but at the same time uh keep the integrity of of the 03:59:01.680 --> 03:59:09.920 process going so but most of all thank you so much for all you do for us and and leading your 03:59:09.920 --> 03:59:16.240 your folks and in striving to better yourselves so thank you very much 03:59:16.240 --> 03:59:23.280 thank you thank you all too just for everybody that put uh all the information into your appeals it 03:59:23.280 --> 03:59:27.360 makes it so much easier for us because even when i'm reading through them on my own and i'm looking 03:59:27.360 --> 03:59:32.720 through the book i really do need y'all's input so i appreciate the people that take time to walk us 03:59:32.720 --> 03:59:39.280 through and explain and make their points and justify that a lot thanks to everyone for all 03:59:39.280 --> 03:59:44.160 their hard work their scholarship and their dedication i'm privileged to be a part of the 03:59:44.160 --> 03:59:51.120 process and i hope that we contributed significantly and have a great day thank you yes thank you all 03:59:52.160 --> 03:59:58.800 um we've reached the end of the agenda uh so i would entertain a motion unless there is 03:59:58.800 --> 04:00:04.800 anything else i would entertain a motion that we adjourn at 1 32 04:00:04.800 --> 04:00:14.960 a motion that we adjourn thank you is there a second thank you all in favor of adjourning say 04:00:14.960 --> 04:00:22.160 aye aye thank you all thank you all so much have a great day stay safe