good morning like to call the what is it the June 5th no June 10th being of the civil service
commission to order first order of business is to introduce guests and as we've done in
the past and most of you've been here before you're the stars you're not the guest today
so I see no one that's signed up to do public comments so we'll move on to the next order
business which is to approve the minutes of the May 27th meeting commissioners you have
those you've got those in your packets I move that we approve the minutes as presented any
corrections comments
seeing none all in favor of approval the minutes of the May 27th meeting say aye opposed alright
next order of business is to take action on the eligibility list from the fire department
driver promotional exams they have the information in your packets I would entertain a motion
that we accept the eligibility list for the promotion not for the driver test so moved
and seconded there any questions discussion hearing none all in favor of accepting the
promotional lists say aye opposed next order of business is the appealed questions the
agenda my agenda says that commissioners here was here was the question that I had earlier
this morning and was cleared to me the the agenda says the captain's appeals and then
the battalion chief appeals they were all presented to us in numerical order four of
those questions four of those 20 questions were battalion chief questions the other 16
were captain's questions but they were presented to us in numerical order so we've looked at
all of them I would entertain a motion that we look at the since there's only four battalion
chief questions I would entertain a motion that we hopefully can dispense of those battalion
chief questions quickly so I would entertain a motion that we pull out the four battalion
chief questions and tackle those first and then go to the captain's questions
commissioner Prado I'm fine with that I don't mind so I can make a motion that we pull those
four out and tackle those first I'll second that motion okay any discussion just FYI those
questions are number 15 34 47 and 70 70 now that being done I have to catch up
there and then I'll go to the captain's questions commissioner Prado I'm fine with that I don't
mind I would say talk among yourselves but since you're not anywhere to talk to anybody
don't talk to yourselves did you have them did you separate them there we go 34 all right
sorry I didn't know if we were going to pass that or not so I didn't pull them out and
look for them the other way all right so just a reminder to the appellants first thank you
all for taking the time and the energy that it took you to study for the test to take
the test and and now to have come back in and appeal your your the decisions and talk
with it so we do appreciate that just as a reminder I want everyone to have a feeling
that when when you quote walk out the door that you have had a chance to at least express
your concerns your your appeal motion but on the other hand we don't need extra superfluous
into information we certainly don't need repetitive information so that way we'll get out of here
before next Tuesday so which I think you probably all appreciate so moving forward you've all
done this before you'd all of these all look like familiar faces I've seen I've seen most
of you before so first question is question 15 and that would be mr. Britain mr. Britain
there you are I have to find you on my screen can you hear me now thank you all for for
doing all this I know that this is a pretty high paying job for you guys but really don't
have a whole lot to add other than I give them what I wrote other than you know usually
you have a whole bunch of books on a study list that cover various subjects still related
to the fire service the the difficult thing about this particular test was that three
of the books were all over the same subject it was all fire service management at the
executive level and even two of them had a different author at least one author for each
chapter so that the chances for there be conflicting information was very high and I'm surprised
there's not a greater number of appeals for us to cover but I just wanted to point that
out and that's kind of where I was coming from that these books are very similar yet
different people writing them with different opinions that's all I have okay questions
of the appellant from the commissioners I don't really have a question I just wanted
to is it possible to make a comment mr. chair yes depends on what the comment is but yes
I just want once again I just want to salute all the the appellants for their their level
of training and scholarship and the effort they put into this test as a commissioner
I don't deal with this stuff every day and but I do my best to try and put myself in
your shoes and also in the department shoes so when we make these decisions we're not
doing it carelessly and we just wanted to acknowledge your scholarship and your hard
work and we struggle with it probably not as much as you but we we struggle with it
nonetheless and so I just wanted to to tip my hat to to all of you that that are under
this process my question is about the question so when you guys are taking the test does
it tell you what source you're supposed to be pulling information from or do you just
it does from that it does to the specific question I believe it said something at the
beginning of the test like these first 25 questions are come from this book and then
whenever it changed the source material then you take it for ours for our test since it
was forced books it was you know kind of a no-brainer is 25 25 between from each each
source material but it's still like I put in my my appeal it's it's a pretty difficult
it's difficult enough whenever you got books of they're covering different subjects like
a rescue book or a safety book or a company officer book there's going to be some overlap
there but but all three of these books were 100% overlap some of us some of the chapters
even have the same title and they're just written by different people different leaders
in the fire service one of them incidentally being uh being chief palsgrove was a contributing
author but uh to one of the books but um the fire chief the fire chief handbook was one
of the books y'all had to study for this test I'm sorry the fire chief's handbook was one
of the books that you have to study first yes fire chief's handbook and then managing
fire emergency services and then uh fire fire service management okay they're all the titles
are even so similar it's hard to remember the okay any other comments for the for the
appellant fire your response we vote to sustain the key based on the mutually agreed upon
rules for the appeals this appeal is invalid since it states material out of a different
book other than the book that the question was taken from
commissioners questions of fire
yeah I felt I feel really uncomfortable just like I did last time I really don't like that
we're making people memorize one-liners from books and then holding them accountable for
that um I especially I understand what the the fire department's saying about sustaining
the key because it was taken from another book but if it's if if his answer if d is
justified in another book that he actually had to study then I think we need to look
at that I think we need to because it's not like he pulled it from some book that he was
reading for pleasure and he's justifying it based on opinion it came directly from another
book even though the title on the 25 questions here you know is like I don't understand how
how we can hold people to that
is that a question for me commissioner
well it's a question and a comment so my I guess the question the comment part is how
uncomfortable I feel with with with making people memorize one-liners and then justifying
it that it's just not in the book that my second my question question is is d an appropriate
answer if it was taken from the fire chief's handbook
no because we asked for it specifically from the other book
no that's not my question my question is is is d justify all the it's is it in the book
is it in this other book whether you ask for it or not is d is d a good answer quoted from
this book understand what you're asking commissioner but we asked that question of the information
and the other book and that is the expectation of the fire department that you know the information
from one book from another
okay and why what's the justification behind that of knowing different answers from this
for the same question from different source materials
I think that the overall answer would be this if with any industry whether it be the fire
service education whatever it is there is tons of information tons of authors all kinds
of all relating to the same subject material and so I might need to know that this book
over here says this and this book over here says this and I need to know the difference
between the two
because it's not one author says this may be true for them and another author says this
may be true in that situation we've got to know the difference between the two
not every book in education is going to say the same thing on the same topic correct
I'm sure but I can justify my answer if I'm looking at theories or if I'm looking at development
or pedagogy I could justify it and make an argument for the next
sure
commissioner I think that commissioner Prado this is this is basically I think what our
next meeting that the part of our next meeting agenda that's already set is to make this
discussion about exactly the discussion that you're asking there's been a long-standing
discussion but we need to we need to talk about that again and that's what our agenda
for the next meeting is along with approval of the lists so I but I do agree that the
question needs the the fire need the fire needs to address the question of the content
and the concepts not necessarily just because the same thing wasn't said and was said and
another book if what was said in the other book is is valid in the question then I think
we have an issue but but that's what this discussion is for our next agenda meeting
and so if we'd be but we'll be bogged down forever today if we if we right now Davis
they've studied for this test knowing that answer needs to come verbatim from the book
that that's been designated so I think we probably need to move on
I do have a question of officer is it Britain Britain yes sir Britain so when you were preparing
for the test was it your understanding that you were going to be responsible for memorizing
specific information was that your understanding rather than necessarily I hate to say this
using your best judgment I wasn't yes and no I guess is I'd heard that and and I read
through some of the rules but I've been a been a captain for 19 years and I haven't
been taking these emotional exams for quite some time so I wasn't intimately familiar
with what was going on and even even though I heard all this I still I still disagree
with it I know in years past back whenever I was taking drivers test captain's test and
promoting up there was a whole lot of questions you know like I said this is 20 years ago
there's a lot of questions overturned back then just by quoting a book that wasn't on
study material and I agree with that that should never be done but this is a book that
I was I was charged with studying it was on the list and we're taught over and over and
over and I've taught as a as a company officer over and over and over that you have as many
tools in the toolbox as you can and then you use them it doesn't matter but doesn't matter
if you know who it came from just matters that you know the tools and that you know
you have a bunch of them to use from and you use them in the appropriate time and uh and
that I knew one is why I kind of phrased the appeal the way I did because I knew that that
was the expectation or I'd heard that that was the expectation but I just still wanted
to appeal it because I disagree with with us being held to that standard I think it's
counterproductive and that this whole process should be at some point about learning something
and not just being able to memorize something thank you yes sir
I'm ready mr chair
we're having a discussion as to what the local rules actually say so everybody just hang
tight for a second thank you so I wasn't ignoring you commissioner bains you you would
never ignore me sir I know and while we're waiting I will officially congratulate you
on your wedding anniversary last week oh thank you so much now it's in the public record
and on television too
thank you so much sir I'm so happy to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy to be here.
Thank you so much.
I'm so happy to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy to be here thank you so
thank you so much sir I'm so happy to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy to
be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy
to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy to be here thank you so much sir I'm so happy
really fast because I'm sure a lot of you would be like they were last time so we just
have to be consistent if we're gonna go just with the with the quoted material and it has
to be from the exact look that they said then let's just hold the key to all of them because
that's not fair that on some of them someone has a more persuasive answer or justification
you know and on some we don't I agree that's what I was sitting here thinking if we change
things now that changes everything that the way we've looked at material for this appeal
process for today it really kind of changes the whole the whole thing for right now so
I and miss Lang's interpretation of it being from the actual book that's given in the in
the test material should become for for at least for today's business that should be
the rule that we use it has to come from the book not the list of quoted material just
I mean I think again we if not we're gonna be here till the next meeting because I don't
know how we get I don't know how we would answer this because it's an interpretation
we need to we need to work on the language at least to suggest a language change perhaps
perhaps need to do that but we need to do that at a later meeting not today all right
we okay with that I'm okay with that okay I would entertain a motion on does anyone
like to speak in opposition to the appeal jet where is he there he is hi Jeff unmute
yourself hear me now yes sir I apologize you said in opposition to material I hit I raised
my hand that time I just I'm not in the battalion chief when I'm in the captain's one but I
did set through the entire driver appeals I just wanted to comment you're making a departure
from what you've established when you make this rule today that you're basically saying
one source materials more authoritative than the other simply because that question came
from that book and I think you have to look at it as all source material in the broader
sense because as one of the commissioners stated your all of these quote something off
another page other than where the answer come from most of these appeals we're going to
handcuff ourselves and I don't I believe they're all equally authoritative not one over the
other just because that's where the question came from I think that's where we wind up
whenever we bring that scope down to just that one page just that one sentence possibly
on an appeal and we're going to run head on into that today because I've already seen
somebody accept you the answers I just want to throw that out there okay I appreciate
that Jeff but that's not a rule that we're making today we actually don't like that rule
we want to change that rule what I'm saying is that if it's actually written and it is
already a rule we can't change it in the middle of the fields I agree with everything you're
saying and so just like we're gonna have to hold the key because that's the rule then
I mean the fire department's gonna have to do the same because I know that at the last
meeting there was maybe one or two that we we got persuaded and we switched and you know
the other ones we did it and so I just want to be consistent and fair for everyone and
then once we meet next month then we do need to change this we need and we need y'all's
input because I don't think it's good I mean even in even in masters program you know the
tests are comprehensive they're cumulative you know it's not just from this one book
so we need to look at that definitely absolutely that's an argument I've been making for what
15 years now so we need to discuss that so thank you Jeff for your for your comments
yes sir I would entertain if no one likes what wants to speak yes just one more thing
that I just noticed it looks like there was in the fire meeting confer agreement and subsequently
there after that was approved on September 24th 2019 there was a section that state that
stated that appeals to the commission under section 143.03 for the Texas local government
code should be limited to the quoted source material attribute attributable to the reference
examination question so it looks like in the recent meeting confer agreement that was looked
at and decided upon so I do have revisions pending right now with the our local rules
that has that particular language in there based on the approved meeting confer agreement
on September 24th of 2019 so I think that resolves the question that you all had limited
to the quoted reference material yeah attributable to the examination the reference examination
question attributable reference yes and that's 143.0.034 that's what they reference in in
regard to the Texas local government code thank you though you're welcome just to clarify
that was an agreement that came upon with the union and the departmental meeting together
and coming to that conclusion and writing that into that contract and miss Lang that
came from the meet and confer yes agreement yes that was approved by council on September
24th of 2019 which basically just clarified for the commissioners you may already know
this and I apologize if you do we have no we have nothing to do with that right we are
not involved in that process at all so they made that decision for us but we have to abide
by that decision we have to abide by it but we don't we had no no yeah we have no say
in that in that meeting confer process right right all right anyone anyone like to speak
in opposition I would entertain a motion on question 15 I move that we sustain the the
code sustain the key excuse me I'll second that discussion I understand what y'all just
wrote on that on that meet and confer but then I really don't see what the need is for
us to review questions the department can just hold the key but I don't need I don't
understand the need for a commission to look at each question if we're just supposed to
hold the key from the quoted source material but that's my own reservation and based on
how the rules are I mean I'm fine with that but I don't agree all in favor of the motion
say aye aye opposed all right motion passes two to one two to two to zero with an abstention
sorry said that wrong question 34 34 Mr. Hornback see him here am I missing him okay question
for 34 is the taken from the fire chief's handbook chief fire chief firefighters job
description has changed significantly specifically since the 1960s with the fire service capacity
for rapid emergency response functions have expanded to include all the following except
fire suppression emergency medical service hazardous materials response technical rescue
high angle trench structural collapse dive team swift water rescue the keyed answer is
a fire suppression the appeal says that the question is faulty there's no correct answer
question implies that fire service functions based on the keyed answer no longer includes
fire suppression fire suppression is still a primary function even with expanded function
fire suppression is still included functions have expanded to include answers bc and d
but also includes fire suppression there are no correct answers to this question since
I'm reading it and we have no appellant fire response sustain the key fire suppression
has always been part of the fire service therefore the fire suppression is the exception in the
list of answers given all other answers have been incorporated since 1960 as listed on
page 396 commissioners question of fire I had difficulty with this question I felt it
was it was not worded properly it was confusing hey this is what this is what I mean so it
says logically we're not asking them to use logically we're asking them to quote the book
so on page 396 I'm not seeing fire suppression on here am I am I looking in the wrong spot
I didn't see it either so then we can't say logically because Mr. Britton would have logically
assumed that the other question from the other book so we can't go back and forth so if it's
not on the page then I don't sustain the key well what I'm sorry ma'am I thought that was
a question for me sir go ahead go ahead if I was just going to say that if it's not there
the question is asking for the exception on the list and therefore the fact that it's
not there it is the exception but your justification you're saying fire suppression has always been
part of the let me go back and reread this question but it hasn't changed significantly
that's the I think I read it about five or six or so times and I was still confused so
it was it was difficult fire suppression has always been part of the fire service therefore
fire suppression is the exception in the list of answers given
that's worded way different so the it is part but because it's not on the list it's the
when it's the exception because it's logical because it's always been there it hasn't
changed since the 1960s I don't disagree with your with your assessment of the question
but that's the that's I think that's the fire logic is that it's not there because it hasn't
changed it's the exception because it hasn't changed since the 60s all these other things
have come in since the 60s I'm sadly enough I can remember the 60s and we didn't have
EMS that much or has met or in the or any of the others so that's the logic I think
I think we need to send fire a question that it's not a good question Chief Skipper are
we getting that it's not a good question but I understand where they're coming from
further discussion so Commissioner Prado are you okay with sustaining the key functions
have expanded to include all following except yeah because what you guys are saying is logically
it would be included because it always has been that just hasn't been updated because
it always has been is that my understanding that right I'm curious to see what if anyone
is speaking for or against the appeal of any other appellants I was that was my that was
where I was going next but anyone like to speak in opposition to the appeal
seeing hearing no one that we have anyone okay I make the motion that we sustain the
key with the understanding this is not a good question I realize that's a that's a compound
that's a compound statement but nonetheless that's how I feel I'll second it any further
discussion I think these are important so whenever people appeal I think it's really
important that they show up because if this person was here I mean I think we could make
a really good argument to throw out the question but since Melon's here to speak on behalf
of the question then I mean I guess I'm forced to sustain the key as well
just FYI throwing out the question is not an option yes based on the the recent meeting
confer agreement throwing out the question is not an option we could accept all the answers
and give everybody but we can't throw the question now so where are we motion is to
sustain the key all in favor say aye opposed hearing none and we thought this was going
to go quickly next is question 47 mr. Boozer I saw you somewhere you keep jumping there
you are keep jumping around on my screen and it's not your fault it's a zoom zoom problem
so all righty question 47 the morning I'll try to keep this quick and short I based my
if you'll hope you guys have the test question in front of you but along with the answers
if you'll look at the answers to that test question it really has no bearing on the content
of the material to try to remember whether something is most likely likely unlikely or
somewhat likely as a test question answer to me doesn't really have any bearing on the
knowledge content that I was required to remember you know I don't know anything else other
than what my statement on on my appeal was to try to convince you that I just I feel
like that to have an expectation that I'm supposed to remember whether something is
more likely most likely unlikely or somewhat likely is a little bit much okay questions
of the appellant and the justification from the department says the magic words direct
wording from the books so there's not much discussion for that okay well you jumped
the gun a little bit but that's all right um five response is direct wording from the
book we vote to sustain the key and I can read the rest of this if you like answer b
and first most firefighters will encounter the unexpected at some time in their career
answers a and d places doubt whether it will ever happen or not
question of fire I have no questions of fire anyone like to speak in opposition to the
appeal I'm sorry Lillian did you have okay anyone like to speak in opposition to the
appeal I would entertain a motion on question 30 those question 47 this is say that again
John you broke up I'm sorry I moved to sustain the key okay sorry about that when your fault
is there a second I'll second it just for just for discussion discussion I have no discussion
all in favor of sustaining the key to 47 say aye aye by the way Mr. Boozer the only thing
I would say to answer your to your concern besides the techniques of the question itself
is that that sometimes gives you some opportunity to plan if you know that that it's very likely
that you're going to run into something you plan accordingly that would be the only thing
that when I dug through this I can make came up with that myself it's just a planning thing
in your own mind to be ready for it so but or or go talk to your union and tell them
that you want those rules change in the meeting confer because I honestly I'm feeling a little
frustrated and I feel a little useless because I'm not I'm being asked to do the exact thing
that you guys are asked to do is to memorize and to not think and so on all of these appeals
I'm being asked just to sustain the key because those are what the rules are and we have to
do that but I'm not using my brain I'm just agreeing with what's already been stated and
so what I would say is if enough of you would go and talk to you tell them you want about
you want that changed okay question 70 mr. Boozer you're back on again you haven't moved
this time you're right there thank you I can't really other than you know the fact that you
yourself chairman Ramsey said that the source material should be quoted verbatim from the
book to simply ask a question that entails all of the following except and to change
a single word in the correct answer validate invalidates the test question in my opinion
because the answer is not verbatim from the book
questions of the appellant I have no questions of the appellant
I'm gonna I don't really have a question mr. Boozer I do have a comment though when you're
writing a test sometimes you have to mean the idea of changing something is what gives
it a test question and gives it that except answer I mean there are there would be no
question to be asked if there were if it all was exactly like it came from the book that's
where you you find that's where you find the finite differences to make the exceptions
now I mean that's a that's a test question testing phenomenon not I agree with you that
it's not in the book but the reason it's not in the book is that that's what was changed
in order to make the question out of it so I don't know if that makes any sense or not
but you you have to change something in order to get a question and that's the the discrimination
that needs to be made so all right fire but to sustain the key all the answers are taken
directly from the text and yes the word no was taken out of the answer on a to make it
a false statement questions of fire hearing none anyone like to speak in opposition to
the appeal seeing no one all in favor the motion is to sustain the key on question 70
all in favor say aye aye sorry I thought mr. Baines did did you make a motion I did not
make a motion oh I'm sorry okay and what we did we get the motion so I make a motion that
we sustain I apologize I thought we I thought that was I just heard that in my head so all
right their second all in favor say in discussion no discussion all in favor say aye aye opposed
okay those are the four battalion chief questions so we can dismiss them again before before
you guys go guy where I'll say this again for the captain so so don't listen but I do
appreciate the time that you put in the effort that you put in to do the study to try to
make yourself better to make us better and so it is more appreciated than you probably
feel that feel right now but it truly is appreciated and thank you for doing what you do for us
so thank you all right next order of business on the agenda is to address the captain's
appeals so back to the beginning here with mr. Roselle okay oh okay unmute yourself
there you are I'm sitting here with Greg Johnson so I just put both of our names up okay if
that helps I appreciate you guys' time thank you so much I know this is a tough job for
you guys my question involves the definition of standards is there any way I can have the
question read we don't have the questions on our end sure question one says blank serve
to regulate an approach system or topic for which they are written blank serve to regulate
an approach system or topic for which they are written the answers are codes guides regulations
and standards codes guides regulations standards the key dancer is a yeah thank you I appreciate
that my appeal has to do excuse me with the the definition of standard and how similar
it is to the definition of code just from the the book the definition of standard actually
includes more than was in the test answer to include standards to have the effect of
law a standard must be adopted by an authority with the legal responsibility to enact the
standard is law the definition of definition of code is a work of law established or adopted
by rulemaking authority so my argument is if and when a authority establishes a standard
it becomes a code and at that point the two terms are interchangeable and it becomes semantics
questions of the appellant I have a question of fire fire responses are there any questions
to for the appellant okay now fire response but to sustain the key this is a verbatim
definition in the book three out of the four answers codes regulations and standards are
interrelated yet very different this is why it is important to know the differences the
keyed answer is the definition of codes in the book specifically a code is a regulatory
approach while standard is more of a measurement my question fire my question of fire is this
you know it has to be a reason you want them to make this distinction and could you elaborate
on that reason why you want them to make this distinction I mean you asked me if you asked
me to learn this I'm learning it for a reason so could you elaborate a little bit on why
you want them to to have this kind of distinction standards and codes are very close but they
are different words so they are different words so a code once it becomes law is law
a standard may be something that we use to measure how well we're doing but it's not
necessarily a law one could put me a live lively on a civil in a civil way and one could
put me lively in a more criminal way so codes are law and standards are something that we
should strive for and to meet but not necessarily hold the weight of law and we should know
the difference between those two things thank you other questions of fire
would like to speak in opposition to the appeal I would entertain a motion on question one
I move that we sustain the code a key the code the key it's all right second discussion
all in favor say aye opposed passes to sustain the key you changed on me next Mr. Johnson
your turn question three good morning guys again for being here like everybody else mentioned
like Mr. Roselle said can I have you guys read the question for me one more time since
we don't have it on our end sure hang on just one second so you've seen it before we hadn't
so but I do have it I'm just giving you our time there so finding the book page the reference
all right the question says with regard to environmental integrity blank is the ISOs foundation
for making effective judgments on environmental integrity the answers are judging let me read
it again with regard to environmental integrity blank is the ISOs foundation for making effective
judgments on environmental integrity a judging the rate of change B defining physical surroundings
C recognizing resource needs D determining rescue profile the keyed answer is a judging
the rate of change okay thank you for that I appreciate it so as I wrote in my appeal
the book does talk about judging the rate of change but my pill stems from to judge
the rate of change in something you have to know what that something is you can't judge
the rate of change in something you're not you're not trying to figure out what that
change is going to be in so I based my appeal off the fact that page 177 it says environmental
integrity can be defined as the status of the building conditions and hazards in terms
of stability which is change potential and time rate of change so determining the hazards
in terms of stability those would be all those physical surroundings that you're trying to
determine if they're changing or not also on page 195 it says recall that the passage
of time is a factor when judging integrity not the factor it's a factor the integrity
listed is referring to environmental integrity both of these passages where I pulled from
in the quoted source material are talking about environmental integrity so the words
and an a in these two passages that I brought up indicate there are multiple factors to
consider concerning the environmental integrity and the other one out of the answer choice
is that it specifically talks about is the physical surroundings on page 195 talking
about environmental integrity involves a consideration of factors such as weather smoke flame spread
and hazardous energy all of those things are your physical surroundings and you have to
know what those things are to then be able to judge the rate of change in them that's
where I come from on this appeal okay questions of the appellant
none fire response I did have a question excuse me okay I'm sorry a little slow and your name
again sir is mr. Johnson Greg Johnson okay mr. Johnson thank you very much so in your
preparation for this examination was it your understanding that you had specific answers
that needed to be looked for and then given was that your understanding
the understanding that I had of any promotional test I've ever taken is that the source material
that we're given we need to be able to quote anything up to and including the copyright
date on that material so we can be tested out of anything it doesn't give specific page
ranges it doesn't give anything other than just a book we're supposed to read so yes
we're supposed to know the material but it's not defined to one section in the book if
it's out of the same source material we should be able to go through the book and pull multiple
references to make our decision and then let me let me let me ask a leading question this
may not be very popular but eventually you know the department has to set a standard
would you not agree that's correct okay and so apparently there's been a standard set
that says this is what we're looking for and and your answer was not necessarily what they
were looking for so I guess my thing I'm trying to say is that while I would love to give
everybody the benefit of the doubt the department has something specifically they're looking
for and that's one of the responsibilities of the department is to define things and
apparently your answer did not match what they were looking for it wasn't a bad answer
I mean it was a very very good answer and a well presented answer but not necessarily
what the department was looking for I understand what you're saying but the the I pulled it
out of the same source material that they're asking for and it's under the same heading
and just on a different page number so it's all talking about the same thing so that's
what I that that's kind of going back to if we're if we're wanting the department to say
we're just supposed to remember a set line we need to make sure that other sections in
the same quoted material don't have additional information to add that then could change
the answer based on that one line in another section thank you Mr. Johnson I have a I have
a question I have a scenario that I want to put to you we get we're getting we are indeed
getting tied up in the book and but here's here's my question it's my scenario to you
I don't know if you were out last night around seven o'clock or so but if you had been out
fighting a fire last night around seven o'clock there was a nice gentle breeze blowing it
was made it a fairly nice night because the front was coming through and about seven thirty
quarter of eight if you were still out fighting a fire there came a time period where the
winds must have gone to thirty thirty five miles an hour if you had been fighting that
fire it isn't just defining the physical surroundings it's judging the rate of change was a gentle
breeze at seven o'clock by eight o'clock it was a roaring torrent of wind and you would
have had to have made a change and made that made a decision based on the the rate of change
not just that oh it's windy so that's where I when I read through this that's where I
came from and last night was just another example of it but the idea I mean what you're
saying the physical surroundings are a part of the rate of change you measure something
in your mind when you begin a process but you're constantly looking to see if things
are going to change so you're still the more overriding of the four answers would be to
judge the rate of change that's not really a question that's more of a comment but you
can comment but I'd like to hear your comments on that no I agree with what you're saying
I agree that you have to take into consideration the rate of change but all those physical
sounds surroundings are going to determine what that rate of change looks like because
it depends where you're at a grass fire is different from a building fire your physical
surroundings dictate that so I mean yeah it all plays together and plays nice I understand
what you're saying but I still feel that my answer is a very viable answer okay fire response
I need I'm sorry any other questions of the appellant none for me thank you fire response
this is a direct quote answer B has little to do with making an effective judgment in
the situation the best answer is a and it comes right out of the text the text does
not stay anywhere that physical surroundings is the ISOs foundation vote to sustain the
key and I'd like to add as far as the expectations that are set for from the department since
it's been brought up at the very beginning of the test we advise people in the strike
in the instructions on the test booklet to pick the best answer in a hypothetical scenario
where there were two answers that may be correct you would still be required to pick the best
answer questions of fire no questions of fire okay anyone like to speak in opposition to
the appeal seeing none I would entertain a motion I move that we sustain the key I saw
it discussion I have no discussion all in favor of sustaining the key on question three
say aye aye or vote with hand that's fine all right chairman I have a request I was
wondering if we could maybe take a 10-minute break sure and I'd like specifically for you
and I and miss Lang to to and a commissioner Prado for us to kind of put our heads together
for a little bit I feel like we need to kind of get recalibrated just a little bit before
we move forward and then we can come back together at it's what 10 after maybe come
back at 20 after or 25 after um hang on John
a little bit yeah.
All right in order to do that we have to move to executive session so I need a motion for
us to move to executive session which means for the appellants that you will be placed
in a waiting room area I mean waiting room situation and let's say probably around 1030
or so will we will reconvene out of executive session so John I make the motion that we
move to executive session please I'll second it all in favor say aye aye motion motion
carries so we will question number nine I call then then come then truck okay he's not
here all right question nine says an example of an of the accommodation strategy for abating
or mitigating a hazard would be blank a pre-hydrating crews and having them perform simple stretching
exercises prior to an assignment be warning a firefighter of a slippery surface see placing
a roof ladder on a pitched roof that requires ascending and descending on a pitched surface
d physical fitness programs that include strength and flexibility training for working for for
work hardening so the key answer is c placing a roof ladder on a pitched roof that requires
ascending and descending on a pitched surface his appeal says page 128 and this would be
out of the safety safety officer so page 128 the last sentence of the accommodation paragraph
states having a water bottle available at each apparatus siting position requires firefighters
to pre-hydrate while en route to a reported incident other accommodations strategy another
accommodation strategy so fire response we vote to accept the appeal or accept c and
a while c is in the book answer a should be considered correct also pre-hydrating crews
is clearly referenced in the accommodation section simple stretching is under the acclamation
section if you read the entire section the last few words clearly refer to reducing injuries
which is the definition of accommodation questions of fire no questions anyone like to speak
in opposition to the appeal seeing no one I would entertain a motion on question nine
okay motion to accept a and c in the discussion I have no discussion hearing none all in favor
say aye aye opposed oh I'm sorry John I saw you okay next is question 12 and read the
writing Jason small Jason is not here okay question 12 says determining the appropriateness
of blank is perhaps the most important decision that the incident safety officer has to make
at the incident scene the answers are risk-taking personal protective equipment air monitoring
operations the keyed answer is a the appeal says if I can read it to see ISO ISO states
on page 167 says nothing about judging risk taking from 168 ISO should don PPE that is
appropriate that is appropriate for the you what is that for the likely potential hazarding
you should read these crystal this is number four in the sequence of importance to the
structure of how in ISO arrives on scene and states starts the end get to engage the incident
PPE is always the most important thing we did we determined this comes before risk taking
is established the medic model is listed after this send on the very page the paragraph below
talks about risk and it says the IC decides on the ISO must confirm the risk taking level
fire response oh yeah fire response fire response right we vote to sustain the key the question
states most important decision not a decision risk taking is clearly stated as the most
important questions for fire I have no questions anyone like to speak in opposition there was
a hand up a minute ago mr. Barzano do you have did you have a comment I know I was actually
I wanted to clear up what the closed session was about how we were going to go forward
today just just because I mean it's the open meeting so I was just wondering why we would
pause in the middle of the open meeting I don't know if that's addressed under the open meetings
act or or just couldn't understand why we're going it is we we have we are able to do that
this language you like to yes if you look at the notice on the agenda for today there
is a section that provides that the commissioners may go into executive session if they feel
a need to do so and any discussions within that executive session does not have to be
shared in the open meeting thank you all right any any questions anyone like to speak in
opposition and commissioners I would entertain as I would entertain a motion I move that
we sustain the key motion second to sustain the key any further discussion among commissioners
anything hearing none John no no no discussion thank you all in favor say aye aye opposed
motion carries next is question 17 mr. Buzaro you're back on oh we also have I'm sorry there
are look at the let me let me get back to my there are two appeals on this so mr. Buzaro
and mr. Miller both so as on what is what is like oh that's that's Buzaro and sorry
I read the comics this morning so and you're not the comedian I didn't mean that okay so
does it yeah okay um I guess uh most of well I based my appeal on just the civil's right
the Civil Rights Act of 1964 it just addresses a broad range of of issues and I can't remember
the the question verbatim if you wouldn't mind reading it to me all right question says
the Civil Rights Act of 1964 covers state and local government practice was relating
to blank and the four answers are voting hiring housing education okay thank you yeah I guess
my argument was to accept multiple answers and I think the department had had made that
decision anywhere to accept all answers I based my appeal on a different book which
was the legal consideration book and I don't think the question came out of that so but
that's all I had okay mr. Miller yes sir there you are now this is directly from my comments
earlier how we're going to run head-on to an issue this he broke based that appeal verbatim
of another book that states everything that's in all the answers on this question but we
can't use it so I'm going to base my appeal out of the book it came out of on page 51
where that where I believe what I can remember of the question you just read comes from underneath
workplace diversity where it says opportunity commission ELC title seven of the Civil Rights
Act of 1964 cover state local governments schools colleges and unions my answer is that
this question states it's related to education education is my answer and the question says
related to well here it says schools and colleges that's direct directly education and that's
the reason that based my answer on that schools and colleges are education question says related
to which is a broad scope in answering it and my answer is education okay question of
the appellants I have no questions sorry can I can I get clarification so for mr. Miller
are you saying that we shouldn't accept all four we should only accept BND it depends
on the rules we're playing by and I'm not being sarcastic I mean we set a different
standard in the driver's appeals that we're using today and I don't I don't know why the
goalposts change today but they did I would say I mean that book has all these answers
in it the other book not the quoted source material no we're going just by the quoted
source material so just by this book by our officer book you're saying we should only
accept B and D right yes ma'am I would I would make that argument as well because what we're
what we're saying is yes obviously anyone that knows for civil rights that includes
all of these if we're looking at other prior knowledge or anything like that then we can't
justify it so we just that's what this that's what our closed meeting was about that we're
gonna if it's in the book then we can justify we can use it but if it's not in the quoted
book and we're not right yes so so then I I'm I'm listening to mr. Miller I agree that
B and D unless someone else can speak on behalf of the other two holding the book
so we have a we have a situation here commissioners where one appellant says A and D and the other
one says D and the department is going to accept all the answers and so I think that
makes sure the problem John I'm not sure that it does I if I understand commissioner Prado's
concern she's saying that we shouldn't accept B and D or B and C because they're not specifically
in the book in this book well on page 51 there's that's that the enumerated one and it says
bail or refuse to hire or discharge any individual so there's the word hiring there and then
up above it says title seven of the civil rights act covers state and local governments
and colleges excuse me schools colleges and unions so the education aspect is listed there
where are you reading I'm sorry I'm on page 51 but I didn't follow you under workplace
diversity you go down to the second sentence there it says title seven of the civil rights
act of 1964 covers state and local governments schools colleges and unions so there's your
education there and then you go down to the next subset it says number one fail or refuse
to hire so there's the word hiring there right so that would mean to accept B and D then
my question who can support accepting A and C under this certain section right I understand
and so back to my response that A and D and the other appellant said D
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
I mean I would make a motion that we would accept B and D is there a second who made
the motion Commissioner Prado okay I'll second that okay the motion is to accept B and D
I forgot to do one thing so anyone like to speak in opposition to the appeal
seeing no one all right motion is to accept B and D discussion
I don't think we can justify accepting A and if this is the appeal that quotes the another
reference then that I mean the justification even said we can't do that we can't accept
another reference source material even though our common knowledge says something else but
yeah I agree with you all right any other discussion okay go ahead Mr. Razel I'm sorry
I just need a little bit of clarification moving forward so the question came out of
fire officer principal and practices but the appeal was cited from another source material
so is that allowed or is that not allowed I know that's kind of been the discussion
for the day we are not we are not acknowledging the other appeal the the outside source okay
the two answers that are the motion that's on the floor reflects the two answers that
are found in the fire officer principles and practices book okay thank you we're trying
we're trying our best to be consistent and not change not change the goalposts and and
let's just say we're trying our best to do what we can do so but those two answers that
the motion come directly from the book that would the material that we're talking about
so all right fair what we decided in the in the closed meeting though that if if there's
something that is from the same book but you can justify your other answer source material
then that's something that that's something that can happen as long as it's not an outside
source if it's coming from the same book but you can justify and you can accept that your
other answer is somewhere else listed in the same book then that is something that's possible
see neither neither appellant asked wait a second all right then be
an appellant mr. bazano asked that that'd be a and d voting and voting is not mentioned
in in this paragraph mr. bazano do you know if it's listed anywhere else in this book
anywhere else in the fire officer book i'm not right after the top of my head commissioner
like i said i was interpreting it from other source material as well even yeah i know common
sense we all know but i know where you're at as far as your position 120 hang on just
a minute
the other reference i was looking at the other the other reference in that book too
to the civil rights act and it simply mentions the civil rights act it doesn't go into detail
so if we look at this when we go with just the detail on page 51 of the book that's what
we have to deal with um i don't did i actually ask for fire response we we we mentioned it
but uh because we we have it in front of us so fire response to appeal of question 17
but to accept all answers it's a faulty question the book that the question came out of is
only referring to title seven of the civil rights act in 1964 of which is not clearly
stated in the question the appeal is referring to another source material book and should
not be considered since it is against the rule set forth
okay who is right okay go ahead go ahead my only my only comment is that even if not referenced
in the question because it's referenced because the question comes from that book i mean i
would i would make the connection that i have to use this but
that's what that's what meet and confer has said
all right uh miss who is it miss who is it mr johnson
yes sir um this question that i'm about to pose is not directly relate well it is related
to this question but it's about my previous appeal on question number three before the
closed session you guys it sounded like we're not going to give um the ability for me to
use a different cited page in the same source material to come up with a reasonable answer
and now after the closed session it appears that you guys are doing that for other appellants
so i'm i'm confused as to how we draw that distinction now between before and after i
pulled i pulled a page number with cited material from a different page in the same source material
on question three and i don't feel like it was given the same credence that is being
given now post that meeting i did bring your question up mr johnson
and and we talked about that that it was it was said that there wasn't enough there wasn't
enough um overlap i don't know if dr ramsey if you want to jump in but we did specifically
talk about your question so we did actually uh give it a lot more than than what my and
i was my personal vote on that mr johnson was uh not so much that my my vote was that
your your request was a subset of a larger better answer and that's that's why that was
that's why i voted that way and that's kind of where and i think that keeps us consistent
and not that that not that we're going to try to be consistent don't get me wrong but
you know we've got to we're trying our best to do what's right for you guys and and i
think my i mean i feel that i made the i made that decision based on the larger better answer
of the two not where it came from in what book so but we did talk about that specifically
and in the session so all right thank you all right um motion is on the floor are there
any other comments i have no more motion is on the floor to accept b and d any other discussion
all in favor of accepting b and d on question 17 say aye aye aye opposed okay question
18 mr johnson where do you go hold on i'm right here give me just a second okay i looked
up and you weren't that's a screen and i knew where you had just been so all right let me
grab my book this came out of real quick okay all right so on question 18 um this came out
of the fire officer principles and practices book um if you can read the question for me
and then i'll go into my appeal based off of that i would appreciate it okay frederick
taylor's theory of scientific management included which of the following principles a division
of labor b equal pay for equal work c mentoring d unity of command
okay thank you uh so i believe that another acceptable answer in addition to the key answer
is b equal pay for equal work where i'm gathering that information is off of page 113 um under
the scientific management heading and the frederick wenslow taylor heading specifically um it
talks about how scientific management is a breaking down of work task into their constituent
elements uh the timing of each element based on repeated stopwatch studies and then the
part i keyed in on was the fixing of peace rate compensation based on those studies that
terminology the fixing of peace rate compensation essentially means equal pay for equal work
so that's where my that's where my appeal is coming from um so that's that's the gist
of my appeal that's that's where i pulled it from and i'd like to hear any questions
or discussion based off that
questions of the appellate i'm on page 113 i'm not seeing that language
commissioner if you look at the top of 113 on the right hand column it is uh the end
of the second sentence and the beginning of the third okay all right thank you very much
you're welcome.
mr johnson can you help me a little bit sure okay so let's go down to taylor's four principles
of scientific management where quote they're summarized one two three four right um replace
rule of thumb work methods with methods based on a scientific study of the task scientifically
select train and develop each worker rather than passively leaving workers to train themselves
number three cooperate with the workers to ensure that the scientifically developed methods
are being followed number four divide work nearly equally between managers and workers
so that the managers apply scientific management principles to planning the work and the workers
actually perform the tasks then the last little section under that heading says factories
that implemented these principles including hemry ford's model t automobile factories
achieved impressive productivity versions of scientific management can still be found
in the 21st century workplace so i guess when i was reading through this i kind of focused
on that to see if i could pull the the equal pay out of that and i really couldn't you
know i do see it on the page up there and so that's where i am trying i understand what
you're saying it's not listed under those four principles of scientific management but
it is least listed in the same heading the same topic area under the same person who
came up with those ideas and it even has a sentence in there that scientific management
is best based on the breaking down of these things that i mentioned and the fixing of
uh piece rate compensation is one of those things it's all within the same context it's
all within the same heading so it's not like i'm pulling this out of another source material
i'm pulling it straight out of the same paragraphs where the answer you're saying is found out
of is located right right right i grant you that i'll just try okay all right i'm trying
to get you there i'm trying to get you i know i appreciate it thank you the problem that
i that i saw with it is peace and and and i understand your interpretation of it but
peace rate work peace rate compensation isn't really in one sense it is equal equal pay
because it's equal rate but you can work harder and make more money and that's and so peace
rate is peace is not equal pay for equal work it's it's the consistency of of the the rate
not necessarily the work itself so if the fireman if when i was thinking through this
it would be like so if you lift a 10-foot ladder you get paid more than if you lift
an 8-foot ladder i mean that would be there you have a rate for a 10-foot ladder and a
rate for an 8-foot ladder i'm being i'm being somewhat silly in that sense but that's the
that would be the difference and that's not what we're what we're dealing that's not what
i don't think that's what taylor was dealing with either uh so
and just to kind of follow that up i do agree that the concept of equal pay for equal work
is included under that heading i see that and where i'm struggling is it says frederick
taylor's theory of scientific management included which of the following principles and then
we're we're tasked with what is the most correct answer it is an answer but is that the most
correct answer that's that's kind of where i'm struggling mr johnson i understand where
you're where you're coming from i also just kind of want to go to go back to what commissioner
ramsey said he said that he can he even verified what i had in this appeal when he said that
he can see that it basically means equal pay for equal work he even said what my appeal
was no i said equal rate equal rate peace work means an equal rate not equal not equal
pay just to make sure that you understand don't
misquote me i said that peace work means equal rate you get a penny for every see i grew
up in a in a mill town where they people were paid by the number of sweatshirts they made
in a day and you had the same amount of money for every sweatshirt you made but if you worked
really really really hard you can make more money than somebody who didn't that's the
that's the peace rate the i mean sorry the the peace work uh one the rate is the same
but the amount of work done is determined by the worker and that's not what he talked
about here so all right thank you
any other any other comments i would entertain a motion sorry oh do we get have we not done
that i'm sorry this copy the way these are copied is really confusing all right uh we're
on question 17 right department response 18 we're on 18 18 all right i have the appeal
on one page and the and the question on another page with a response so i'm sorry so question
18 the fire response is sustain the key the question and answer reference together the
main premise of this theory is stated on page 113 is to break down jobs and too simple to
follow steps that have been determined to be the most efficient way to perform a job
okay questions of fire hearing none i if we could for a second um
does it specifically say division of labor anywhere here tell me i know the concept is
presented but does it specifically say division of labor it says divide work equally okay
i see that but does it say division of labor but that's really but that's really different
okay division of labor and divide work nearly are pretty much the same i don't think anyone
can draw a distinction between that but piece rate compensation and equal pay for equal
work those are different division of labor and equal pay for equal work are different
is what you're saying no no you're you're you're asking if division of labor and divide
work equally can be can be interpreted as one in the same and i i think yes but i could
interpret it the same but i was asking is it specifically is that phraseology of those
terms specifically mentioned that's all i was asking i know i guess i was trying to
i was trying to see if could we say the same for um for the piece rate compensation and
equal pay for equal work could we make the same comparison to those two terms so that
we could accept b but i don't think we can yeah okay
mr prude yes can you hear me yes sir okay in opposition to the appeal the only thing
that i could say that we could in which we could accept both answers is if the author
somewhere in the book defined piece rate compensation as equal pay for equal work and i don't find
that anywhere in the book okay thank you commissioners i would entertain a motion a motion that we
sustain the key second any discussion i have no discussion okay all in favor say aye okay
next is question 44 all right you guys ready rezel um wait we have to change books hang
on
we feel your pain but we have it all we have them all at the same time so you have to be
test on we're going to find them so all right mr roselle where are we yes sir right here
my appeal is drawn upon logic and critical thinking so we'll see how this goes the topic
that the questions regarding is prioritize and execute which the author in layman's terms
breaks it down to relax look around make a call it's the idea of slowing down figuring
out what the the correct next move is and uh and acting upon that part of that is like
the question says through careful contingency planning a leader can anticipate likely challenges
that could arise and i'm not arguing that but if you flip back over to page 158 same
source material the second full paragraph goes into depth about the extensive training
used to learn the prioritize and execute or prioritize and move philosophy and it says
this process was not intuitive to most people but can be learned built upon and greatly
enhanced through many many iterations of training so my argument although it it's not verbatim
from the text i i will acknowledge the question is verbatim from the text the answer logic
would say that ultimately it was the extensively designed training that allowed for the contingency
plan the plans to be created in the first place so without the training you wouldn't
be able to develop the contingency plans effectively okay thank you questions of the appellant
questions no there's product questions no i'd like i'm curious about the department
okay mr baynes i'm i'm i'm there i'm still looking at page 158 that the gentleman referenced
and i was trying to make sure i didn't go too fast so please forgive me for being a
little slow no that's not the we want to do this right as best we can so
because we are in the same book same reference material so we're good we're good there the
question is can this particular answer be considered the best answer for this question
why don't we go ahead and do the fire response which might spark either okay might even might
spark more discussion or it may not so um fire response
you're you're muted you're muted there we go we vote to sustain the key it's verbatim
from the book the correct answer is c d is not a correct answer because the training
that the appeals referring to was happening right then and it required the team leader
and team to make decisions under pressure as it was happening the question is clearly
asking how someone or the team can respond or plan to respond to something before they
happen which is clearly not happening in present time like a training scenario this makes d
the faulty answer and c should be considered should be the only accepted answer
questions of fire isn't that why you train that you can be put in those situations i
mean the training is part of your hands-on learning it's putting you in scenarios and
coming up with try it's kind of like safe safe trial and error
i completely agree with you commissioner i completely agree with you as the training
officer so commissioner prado do i hear you saying then that d could also be a correct
answer yes i could add something more to this to distinguish
between the two if you like if training happens all the time and covers a broad arrangement
of topics if i'm going to attack a mission and i have to plan make contingency careful
contingency planning that's very specific to that mission that i'm about to carry out
so we're going from a broad general topic of training to know how to do my job to very
specific mission oriented i got to prioritize and execute these specific things and then
i have to plan a contingency for those things training makes me better at doing that but
this is specific to that point i can see a distinction between planning
versus training i can see a distinction we have a lot of training so that when we get
to the real time situation we can develop a plan of action without that training it's
very difficult to to to provide an adequate plan of action so i do see a difference there
between the the training and the planning i just want to make sure that when i'm looking
at this question stepping into and examine these shoes that that that i'm giving the
benefit of the doubt when i see this
hey i'm sorry i was i was out of commission somebody bring me off the commission
no um somebody bring me back to we were with the discussion when we when we left was that
it was perhaps bnd have we gone beyond that cnd cnd i'm sorry
okay um is there anyone like to speak in opposition to the appeal
seeing no one hearing no one um commissioners i would entertain a motion on question 44
uh i would i understand what you're saying um
mr skipper but uh i do understand so i was i read the second part uh through what would
make more sense through a careful contingency planning a leader can anticipate likely challenges
that could arise uh or through extensively designed training a leader could anticipate
likely challenges that could arise during an execution i understand and i uh but i think
that for this question i don't think i don't think there's enough of a um distinction yeah
so i i would i would make a motion that we accept c and d as the answer
i'll second that motion it's been moved and seconded to accept answer c and d for question 44
discussion
no discussion for me
no discussion all in favor of the motion to accept c and d say aye
aye opposed
okay um when i left for just a second someone still had a question about the the closed meeting
discussion and um i just want to to bring just to clarify our discussion in that meeting was to try
to get us a reading of what the legal ramifications were of our decisions based on chapter 43 which is
the civil service code for the state uh meet and confer and even local rules but it was our
discussion was more of a legal the legal issue of it uh so so i just i say that just for clarification
that we were dealing with we were trying to get a sense of the legal issues that we were
that we were dealing with at this point so okay now question 45
mr pazano yes sir can you read the uh question to me please um hang on just a second yes i i i can
i just have to make sure that i find it why do i have
are there two appeals or three three appeals okay i'm sorry
the printer is messing this all up 44
okay all right i got you
your appeals are on front and back of the paper and so anyway the question um that part i can do
frontline leaders must have trust and confidence in blank to know that they are empowered to make
decisions the answers are their subordinates b themselves c their policies d the senior leaders
the keyed answer is d their senior leaders
now oh again since we've got mr pazano up
i'll let you go ahead okay thank you um i based my appeal on the concept that the author is
describing uh decentralized command and um so he was speaking about having confidence in not only
your senior leadership but also your subordinates and that's why i think that um
the question or the answer a would would be the same or also acceptable so compared to uh answer
d if we look at the page that it's referenced from i believe it's referenced from 171 in uh extreme
ownership let's see uh for any leader placing full faith and trust in junior leaders with less
experience and allowing them to manage their teams is a difficult thing to embrace it requires
tremendous trust and confidence in those frontline leaders so when he says frontline leaders i i
believe that to be referencing to the uh junior leaders who must very clearly understand the
strategic mission and ensure their immediate tactical decisions ultimately contribute to
accomplishing the overarching goals frontline leaders must also have must also have trust
and confidence in their senior leaders to know that they are empowered to make decisions and
that their senior leaders will back them up okay thank you uh mr johnson
anything to add
um no sir i think mr pesano pretty much stumped it up well um i pulled my appeal from the same page
that the department like he was talking about got their answer off 171 like he said the whole whole
idea of this was decentralized command and the word also where it says frontline leaders must
also have trust and confidence in their senior leaders that also is there because the entire
paragraph before is talking about how the the top has to have confidence in their junior leaders
so that's that's where i based my peel off the same information that he pulled his from
okay thank you mr rozelle
nothing to add there you are
question of the appellants questions to the appellants
um
so you know i um
i did struggle with this question so i want you to know that this was not an easy question for me
and you know as a as a platoon leader you know in the military
did my authority come from the subordinates or did the authority come from
the um the senior superiors that's kind of where you know where does my authority come from
and really the authority came from periods now my juniors have to have confidence in me
but really my authority to act and to do things comes from the senior so i could i could see where
there's the need to embrace the juniors but when you ask the at least for me
when you when you when you're asked where does my authority come from it really comes from my
superiors rather than from my subordinates so that's kind of how i look at it now i don't know
if things have changed significantly that's just how i viewed it so i i appreciate that thank you
commissioner um i think it's just a matter of mindset too i i agree with you your legal
authority comes from your superiors it comes from you know um the authority either comes from your
badge that you are pinned with i guess i take a little different idea that a lot of authority
comes from those who you ask to follow you as well i would not have any authority should no one
believe in me or want to you know follow me and especially with this with this type of um
with this passage here i i took it as meaning that um i think it was life babin who was the one who
who wrote this section i took it to mean that he was he was he was expecting his frontline leaders
which are his subordinates or his junior leaders to have um full faith and confidence in himself
and that he had that he also had full faith and confidence in them so that's where i got that's
kind of where i was was going with my uh with my appeal oh i could see that is goes both what you
know goes up and down and yeah i i see i guess you know in the final analysis i mean if all the
juniors run away yeah i still have authority but that authority is based upon the ones that have
given it to me right and this is a really hard and this is a really hard question just because
it is simply stated if i take that one sentence yes okay yes they got me that's true but i i take
it as a bigger picture and that's that's kind of where i'm coming from any other questions of the
appellants second mr razelle
thank you i just want to reiterate also the fact that the the test writers excluded the word also
from the otherwise verbatim text question which confounds the ambiguity of the answer even further
it's almost as if the test writer recognized that the author had spent the the whole paragraph
talking about trust and confidence in other people and and finishes the paragraph with the test
question so if the well i can wait for the department to give their ruling but i don't
think it's fair to say it's verbatim from the text when the question itself is technically not
verbatim from the text i think that's important to recognize
thank you anyone else any other questions okay fire response
we vote to sustain the key stated in the text the text does not state the frontline leaders
must have trust and confidence in their subordinates the appeals are trying to
make a correlation that junior leaders must have trust and confidence in their subordinates
and the text does not state this either
question of questions of fire
this is supposed to be commissioners commissioners
i'm struggling i'm struggling because i i can see it both ways
you know commissioner uh commissioner you know you you you made reference
to your educational background and and answering some questions and so when i think back to my
years in the military and even you know my training and rotc prior to that you know i just
i mean you got you got a need both ways you need you need you need the support of those above you
but when you have stripes or or whatever you have on your you know you need the the people below
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
struggling basically i'm struggling with this because i don't want to be cavalier with people's
career i want to i want to make sure i give them the best answer
anyone like to speak in opposition to the appeal
commissioners i would entertain a motion
mr mr johnson sorry thank you i appreciate it uh what i'm struggling with is i don't understand
how the department is saying that the the text or the material the cited reference material doesn't
specifically talk about putting faith and trust in junior leaders i'm on page 171 under that
paragraph talking about decentralized command and it says for any leader placing full faith and
trust in junior leaders with less experience and allowing them to manage their teams is a difficult
thing to embrace it requires tremendous trust and confidence in those frontline leaders who
must very clearly understand the strategic mission and ensure that their immediate tactical decisions
ultimately contribute to accomplishing the overarching goals this is where it comes to
that other the frontline leaders must also have trust and confidence in their senior leaders the
reason that has that sentence is because everything else in that paragraph in the cited source material
has been talking about placing trust and confidence in those junior leaders
mr skipper i'll go chief skipper i'll give you a chance to respond to that if you'd like
the whole section you just read greg was read from the perspective of a senior leader
and how he feels towards a junior leader the question is asking frontline leaders must have
trust and confidence in blank to know that they are empowered to make decisions so if you're a
frontline leader and your senior leadership doesn't empower you to make decisions then you won't and
that's basically what that whole section just said mention that last sentence again for me please
the last sentence you mentioned i said that if if frontline leaders are not empowered which is the
word that the question uses by their senior leadership which was the perspective of that
whole section that greg just read then frontline leaders won't make decisions and they'll just
always push them up the chain of command i'll make a motion mr here yes sir that we accept uh
answers a and d i'll second
okay motion seconded to accept answers a and d
discussion i have none
my question in this whole thing was
the the assumption that a subordinate is a junior leader
and i'm not sure where the junior leader and subordinates are separated
however that for that reason i'm i'm going to vote for a and c
i don't know where the separation was between is between you know is it is a junior leader if we
put it into a fire situation is the senior leader the captain and the junior leader the subordinate
and the firefighters the i'm sorry the j the captain is the junior leader and the subordinates
are the firefighters or i mean that's the that was the problem that i was having and i think
for that reason i think both answers need to be there a and d you mean a and d yeah you said c
so i'm sorry a and d i'm sorry thank you
so all right no other discussion we better vote we gotta vote we gotta vote
yeah all in favor say aye aye all right okay
next is question 54
mr die there he is yes sir he waited patiently
uh my my appeal is just based on the principle of the the initial sentence the question itself
just simply ask you which of the following statements is true
and when you get into the reference material on the page that it states it it goes through
two phases of overhaul there's free control and there's post control sort of depending
on which phase you're in all of the choices would be correct
okay questions of the appellant commissioners
um in my reading of this particular question i'm on page um 190 at the very top
it says overhaul may be performed in the following two phases pre-control and post-control
um and then as i went back and read the material that preceded it and went
afterward it seemed like the only answer that seemed appropriate was the one that mentioned
before and after which would have been a before overhaul may be done either before or after the
fire is under control which was pre-control and post-control um i didn't really see those d and
c as being uh excuse me i didn't really see b c and d as being appropriate because it said
before and after so if there's a way you can help me uh mr die i'd greatly appreciate it
i was just looking at the simple fact that if it says that uh overhaul has to be done after the
fire is under control yes that would be in your post-control overhaul yeah so just that that's
what i've based it on it i may be way off base i just when i read the question it says which
of the following are true they all rang true to me just depending on what phase of overhaul that
you're in so i mean if this appeal is not valid that's that's perfectly fine i'm just uh it just
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
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
overhaul should never be done before the fire is under control yes sir so that would be that would
be your post-control yeah yeah uh before before the fire is under control and then you know to me
that's pre isn't it in that pre before your fire is under control will be pre-control yes sir right
right so if you say overhaul should never be done in in pre-control then that contradicts
you know that's not a true statement it has to be done both before and after yes before the fire is
under control and then after so just by taking that one you could not say that all four are correct
you know so and to me the one that was the most correct was was a so yes sir i accept that that's
perfectly fine um all right good i had a hard time with it i guess i was wrestling with you i wanted
to make sure i gave you every benefit that's perfectly fine i thank you you're welcome
other questions of the appellant fire response
we vote to sustain the key the book clearly states the overhaul can be
performed pre-control and post-control this makes a the best answer
questions of fire i have no questions of fire i have a comment that that
again it's it's always go for the best answer
and if there are two that you're dealing with go with the best one and so
anyone like to speak in opposition to the appeal hearing none commissioners i would entertain a motion
i'll make a motion that we accept or we sustain the key i'll second discussion
hearing none all in favor say aye
aye 54 sustain the key and 58
i guess that's me in that he's not here
all right um question says what is the primary concern
in roof dental what is the primary concern in roof ventilation a the size of the opening the
location of the opening what type of tool to use in making the opening or the safety of firefighting
personnel and the keyed answer is d the safety of the firefighter person the firefighting personnel
uh the appeal says on a handbook of tactics page 259 hang on let me get there
there with me um
all right
okay the appeal says uh first paragraph of page 259 the first step in making any ventilation opening
is to locate the proper site usually as close to directly over over the fire as safe as is safe
um so he says that the another answer b is the correct answer that would be the location of the
opening so fire response
vote to sustain the key book clearly states in the second column about four lines down
that the safety of the members performing the task is always the first concern
appeal is based on the sequence of cutting the hole and not the concerns
questions of fire i do have a question of fire uh so so chief chief skipper
when does the the uh the location and the size of the hole when does that become important
after the safety of the firefighters is concerned
it comes when when you decide that you're going to actually cut a hole then we start looking at
hey we need to cut a hole this big we need to put it over the location of the fire so the fire is
contained and that it actually is big enough to release all the heat and smoke from so you would
you would never make that consideration until you number one said is this a safe decision
correct thank you so that doesn't even come into consideration yeah the first thing is before we
would get on the roof and actually cut a hole is is it going to be safe that's what i needed
thank you yes sir from i think from my experience and at this in this place that's partially the
cutting the hole is the safe is dealing with the safety of the firefighters as much as it is
anything else i mean you don't cut the hole and let's because except for the fact that it makes
the fire safer for the firefighters if i remember correctly from my other opportunities to have here
so all right other questions of fire i have none so just on i guess just because um
so logically we would we would work on the safety right we'd make sure that it was safe
that's a logical that should be ingrained that you know obviously you're not going to go into
something knowing or expecting that you're going to get hurt but on that page 259 without reference
to safety on top of that page it does say that that it's it's exactly the first step in making
any ventilation opening and it i mean it even says the first step is to locate the proper site so i'm
just learning that out there does that change anything for anyone i know that the question here
is what is the primary concern in roof ventilation so because it's talking about roof ventilation
specifically we would not say that it's the
locating the proper site locating that where the proper opening should be
geeskipper i was wondering if that was for me or is that for y'all to discuss amongst yourselves
no i anyone that would help me understand sure so um the to i'm trying to phrase this is not an opinion
getting on a roof to getting on a roof to cut a hole is one of the most unsafe things that we can
do if there's a fire underneath this so we have to really carefully look at that roof and consider
the sagging of the you know the the decking that kind of thing we sound the roof when we get on
there if we get on top we start hitting it with um holes and determine if it's soft before we
actually put our weight on a roof and that's all in regards to the safety of it but the actual act
of cutting a roof which this is this is talking about roof ventilation which is all that stuff
combined but the act of actually cutting the hole okay yes this is safe i got to where now where do
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
but the whole ventilation of roof ventilation can bind together we have to consider safety first in
all of that i understand i guess i'm just trying to i'm trying to differentiate with what the book
says with what your common knowledge says by experience so your common knowledge by experience
is you have to make sure that it's safe you have to take all those other things into consideration
but yes from the book and it's talking just about the vent so the first step in making any
ventilation opening is to locate the proper site usually as close directly over the fire i mean
this this is what it sounds like to me if i'm i know all those other things i know you'll have
to take those into consideration but just like in the past i'm not i'm not necessarily or we
haven't necessarily been talking about experience we're talking about what's stated in the book
so i mean i'm i'm but in the book it clearly states in the second column as my as the
departmental response says the second column about four lines down that the safety of the members
performing the task is always the first concern right that's on page 371 but on page 259
it's saying something so i'm just looking at his appeal and he's making a valid point to me
well the the one thing on 259 it says and i'm reading from what exactly what you were saying
except that you left out two words and that is is safe usually as close to directly over the fire
as is safe so safety still comes into play even on 259 therefore safety still keep i mean there's
safety twice so i think again i think safety is is the primary concern doesn't say just go up and
cut a hole so it's location where it's safe right but you're using your you're using your common
knowledge so i'm using what's in the book you're using i'm using what's right here in the book
says it's safe when you read that when you read the sentence off of 259 you left the two words is
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
talking about well yeah obviously you're not going to cut it you're going to determine what's safe to
determine where where the proper site would be to cut so safety still becomes the best answer
i don't know i mean i i i mean i would make a motion that we accept both
dandy okay hang on one second you can make that i i you but i'm sorry are you asking for something
else yeah first i have to is there anyone like to speak in opposition to the to the appeal
mr pruett yes thank you thank you very much commissioner prada i believe if we read the
very next sentence on page 259 it's in parentheses and it says note for this text whenever i refer to
directly over the fire i mean as close to that area as is safely possible considering the
conditions of the roof the danger of collapse and other such factors so i think the author is
addressing safety in making that first step of the ventilation opening to locate the proper site you
can't locate the site unless it's safe to get on the roof and and he's reiterating that fact
and i hope hopefully i explain that to you no i agree i agree i'm trying to i'm trying to
differentiate between what i see is written and between what you know my experience yes and that's
why i brought up that second sentence on page 259 because the author is saying you you have to be
safe before you decide where to cut that hole you're welcome okay anyone else like to speak
in opposition to the appeal now we can entertain a motion on question 58
do you ask for the motion yes i'll still motion that we accept b and d
oh i'll second
okay motion is to accept b and d
discussion
now now i realize that i could have uh allow the motion to die for lack of a second and i
didn't do that because i wanted to make sure we had the opportunity to discuss any more things
but i do feel that um the um the safety is the primary issue for me rather than the location
okay all in the motion any any other discussion motion on the floor is to accept b and d
all in favor of that motion say aye
all opposed aye motion fails
i would entertain a alternative and alternative motion i make the motion that we sustain the key
and i'll second it
any discussion
all in favor say aye opposed
okay motion carries two to one next question is 67
and the appellant is
mr small and he's not here so i'm reading the appeal to okay um
question 67 says some of the most dangerous multiple dwellings to operate in operate in
during fire conditions are buildings blank answers to fill in that are with one or with more than one
open stairway b which have been renovated c with only one window per room d which have eight foot
ceilings the keyed answer is b which have been renovated the appellant says that quite that
answer a with more than one open stairway should be an alternative or in another answer
and again we're in the handbook of tactics page 400 well the the appellant says 400
and the the question comes from 391 so the um the appellant the appeal reads
if i can read it uh page 400 spends the whole page talking about how dangerous open stairways
are this is in the same chapter as the question was taken from question involves a single paragraph
although the all through the book the author talks about how dangerous open stairways are
uh says that there are
chimneys and the main exposure to protect uh the most serious situations are usually
encountered at fires in the down apartment is that right down apartment because the
chairs the stairs are the equipment are the equivalent of a cellar stair going down
are also a pic mentioned opening staircases on this page one paragraph about renovating buildings
question lacks detail to answer the question i didn't read that very well but basically
saying that about open stairways is the um should also be included so um fire response
to sustain the key verbatim in the book the answer is clear in the book at the top of the second
column answer a is stated as an option in the appeal is not correct the appeal refers to the
section of the book where it talks about the dangers of single open stairway going up or down
to a floor answer a states with more than one open stairway having multiple open stairways
to any given force gives victims more than one way out it also gives a primary path one of the
stairways for the heat and smoke to travel thus making additional stairways more tenable
questions of fire
uh
is there any instance in which um the appellant's concerns are validated
i would not disagree with the fact that open stairways can be dangerous
can be but it's not the most dangerous no
are the questions of fire
anyone like to speak in opposition to the appeal
seeing no one
commissioners i would entertain a motion
i'll make the motion that we sustain the key
one second any discussion
no discussion for me all in favor of sustaining the key for 67 say aye aye
okay next is question 68
okay we have two appeals
question is 417
okay question says taxpayers may be broken down into two general classes new style and old style
the older style style taxpayer a are generally three to four floors in height
b has a tremendous amount of combustible materials in his construction c is always one floor in height
and d has become the most hazardous building for firefighters to operate in and we have
two appeals um mr miller i'll let you go first since since i don't want to read it unless i have
to okay um on this appeal if we uh look to the top of page 415 which is chapter 16
we see that the title is store fires slash taxpayers and strip malls so defining store
fires as taxpayers we'll see that in the text and if you'll flip over to 416 at the bottom of the
page left hand side we read there's an italicized taxpayer word it says the term used to describe a
row of stores and other occupancies such as local pizza parlor chinese food housed under a single
roof um although not recognized in any building code this description has come to be accepted
by the fire service as any multi-store commercial structure described previously that is built of
class three ordinary construction my point is multi-store commercial structure that's what a
taxpayer is um if we go back to the test question where they pulled the question was from 417
underneath styles of taxpayers it does call out new and old style and then the answer says old
style taxpayers have tremendous amount of combustible material in its construction i agree with that
it's right there but the effect of that is all that is written in those first two pages and the
entire chapter it talks about store buyers and taxpayers and just to single out old style if you
look at the figure six dash two where the old cars are there it says uh old taxpayers often hold as
many as 20 stores under one roof so taxpayers and stores are used up in the same way old tack if
there's a taxpayer buyer it's a store buyer and you can see that in the picture so if we look at
the graph at the top of page 416 it clearly shows uh 16.6 firefighters are killed for 100 000 buyers
and that's the highest amount of firefighters that are killed amongst those uh four occupancy
classifications or types of structures that that bar graph shows and that substantiates my answer
of them being the most hazardous i think that's what the answer was i'm something like that i
don't have those but i tried to remember what you read that is the most hazardous for firefighters
to fight that store fires kill more and even in the text it says four times more than residential
and it also lays out four different types of structures there so i would say it's even the
best answer due to safety if you looked at all those answers you said which one's going to keep
us safe it's going to be the answer that tells you that's the most hazardous store most hazardous
place to work is on a store fire because it kills more people i would say it's even a better answer
than what we have key okay thank you sir um mr small says most dangerous buildings are taxpayers
many are both string uh which the page in question the page the question is on references
that they are the most dangerous it also has a picture a pic of a fire where firefighters died
answer d is talked about on the page in multiple places i response oh i'm sorry questions of the
appellant got ahead of myself that is there an instance where it specifically says
the answer that she gave that it's the most hazardous to operate in he's referencing figure 16 1
on page 4 16 i see 16 1 i was just looking for the specific terminology i'm sorry
i had a question so can can stores be considered um new style can someone build a new commercial
development and it be considered new style as well or does it always have to be the old style
i'm thinking of all these you know things that are popping up all over the place around teasley
they meet your requirement that says you know pizza parlor chinese food like all the multiple
occupancy whatever can those be considered new style
sir class three construction yes ma'am okay so okay then that kind of for me that kind of
takes away the connection that you're making
okay i the uh excerpt under the graph bar graph up there just talks about commercial buildings
four times more deadly to firefighters and residential so i just pointed out old style
just because that's what that's what the answer was i'm including it in all of it i mean because
the bar graph doesn't call out old style i just wanted to point out that if i don't know what
the department's going to say and if they tried to weed me out by pointing just the older style i
wanted to make that connection but i'm not singling it out because it does include new and old saw
because taxpayers is both right taxpayers both but i guess because the question says the older
style taxpayer you have to make a connection only with that older style taxpayer i get what you're
saying all right thank you
any other questions
okay fire response but to sustain the key the answer is clearly stated in the book
the book does not state that they are the most hazardous buildings as stated in answer d making
this answer false questions of fire okay even though it doesn't state that it's the most
hazardous is it the most hazardous type of building is that where most of your hazards are
no may i may i so my i i'm thinking through this too so they're saying the older style
taxpayer has become the most hazardous building but that's not what it's saying it's saying that
the that the stores are the most hazard buildings and under storage you can have new style and old
style i think that's the correct response there commissioner that the question actually asked
for the distinction between the new style and old style and to say that commercial structures
are the most dangerous i would concede that point however it's trying to make a distinction
between two styles of taxpayers not that doesn't include super stores or or malls or you know all
these other commercial occupancies that would be included in that big global term commercial
occupancy it's asking specifically about old style taxpayers well the one thing that i haven't heard
us mentioned i haven't heard us in the discussion is the amount of combustible materials in the
construction doesn't why does an old old style taxpayer is it is it because of what the materials
are because they're old style they had different materials and rather than the new styles which
makes may or may not make them more hazardous but is the materials the the fire suggested answer or
the text text test writers answer is has a tremendous amount of combustible material
so address that aspect of it if you will please chief skipper so you can say old style construction
is mostly wood framed it's going to have especially class three is going to be a masonry exterior or
masonry walls and then all the framing would be done with wood and then new style would be like
aluminum studs that you see sometimes these metal you know that they have a masonry or brick veneer
exterior and then the actual framing of the structure is going to be out of some sort of
metal component and it doesn't have to be a wooden frame so there's inherently going to be more
combustibles in the framing and the building of an old style taxpayer so that makes them less hazardous
yeah
i don't i'm not going to say it makes it less or more hazardous it doesn't make them
the most hazardous i don't think you can draw that line and say that with
any sort of study that would support that statement or the text from the book
okay mr miller yes sir um on page 418 in the second column that first paragraph
it reads newer style taxpayers face some same dangers of fire spread through the cock lock
as older ones do in addition there's a likely problem of early collapse of unprotected steel
route so if we're trying to draw a distinction between one being safer than the other that's
just not the case and i would say that's why in the bar graph there it didn't make that distinction
either we're talking about complete newer and older all taxpayers are grouping there
i just wanted to point that out that that construction is just as dangerous according to the text
the new style is just as dangerous
yes on 418 it talks about the some of the they're faced with the same dangers of fire spread through
the cock lock that they they have a common attic all the way across because of the because of that
material it can collapse even earlier so then so then d would be wrong then because um your
question you're saying the older style taxpayer has become the most hazardous so you just proved
your you just proved the opposite that you're saying that both new style new style can collapse
even faster i mean did i understand that wrong no you probably did i'm just trying to make
i don't the the bar graph doesn't do does not divide them up and
but the reason that this it talks about this the chapter is named store fires taxpayers and strip
malls and it talks about this for three pages and the question is this one excerpt of older style
taxpayers so what i'm saying is that combustible construction leads to answer d also being correct
the store fires are most hazardous it says fire fighters store fires or fire killers is the first
sentence four times more likely to kill so b leads to d being correct right b leads to d being also
correct but b is the best answer yes ma'am i say it's the best answer because of the safety factor
you have to know this and the text speaks more to that than it does combustible construction okay
would anyone like to speak in opposition to the appeal
oh there you are yes sir be sure and unmute yourself
morning clint stevenson um i i'm not sure that i even know what the question is anymore
can can we reread the question and the answer choices so that and then i'm going to try to
walk through all those answer choices for you if i can i can find if i can find the question
i can read the question okay it says taxpayers may be broken down into two general classes
new style and old style the older style taxpayer blank that's the question
so the older style taxpayer are generally three to four floors in height the older style taxpayer
has a tremendous amount of combustible material in its construction the older style taxpayer is
always one floor in height the older style taxpayer has become the most hazardous building for
firefighters to operate in so if i okay so really my my thing is if you read it that way the older
style taxpayer has become the most hazardous building for firefighters to operate in that is
a false statement the only true statement there is the older style taxpayer has a tremendous amount
of combustible material in its construction and that is directly quoted from the left agreed
that's the answer that they're looking for right i mean that's the key to answer
yes correct i mean you can make a lot of things inclusive draw enough parallels but i i just don't
think the test question supports any of those answers that's all i've got i just couldn't
remember what we were talking about yeah are you open for a motion or are we still discussing
i think we're ready i think we're ready for a motion now okay i'll mention that we sustain the
key i'll second
moved and seconded to sustain the key any discussion
uh yes by by taking the time to go through items on page 418 helped me to make that decision
so thank you for doing that okay ready to vote ready to vote all in favor of sustaining the key
of 68 say aye opposed question 69 and we have three appeals okay sorry okay let's go with
mr pruett we haven't seen heard it from him in a while so yes sir you can go first thank you very
much other than what i turned in on the written appeal the only thing i would add three things
that we have to consider the author the test maker and the test taker the author gave us one
definition on page 155 and by the time he got to page 456 he forgot about that and included a
second definition that is a little bit broader possibly and so when we moved to the test maker
he skipped over page 155 to begin with and only wrote the test based on page 456
so now we move to the text test taker that's all of us sitting before you virtually and um for me
my recollection of the memorized material stopped at page 155 so that's why i'm asking you to approve
and allow both answers from both pages 155 and 456 and you're saying c correct you're saying
another answer c is also correct i believe that's what's on my okay yes that's correct just checking
yes all right mr johnson i'm going to go to you next
all right thank you uh to start with can i have you read the question please
considering high-rise fires it has been said the longer the reflex time is
the larger the fire you're likely to face reflex time is a the amount of time it takes to board
apparatus respond to the building and enter the building with proper equipment b response time
hose laying time and fire control time c the amount of time to respond and get to the fire
location and d elapsed time from receipt of the alarm until an effective stream is flowing on the
fire the keyed answer is d elapsed time from the receipt of the alarm until the effective
stream is flowing flowing on the fire okay thank you i'm with mr pruitt on this the book specifically
has two different definitions that are called out on the different pages one on page 155 like
he talked about in the other on page 456 the one on 456 is kind of an all-encompassing thing it says
reflex time is a total time elapsed from receipt of the alarm until an effective stream is flowing
on the fire however on page 155 the part about an effective stream flowing on the fire is not there
we're left with two different definitions in the book and the source material
so i believe the answer a in addition to what they're saying c and then in addition to what
the test was keyed as d are all correct applicable answers a says the amount of time it takes to
board the apparatus respond to the building and enter the building with proper equipment that's
what i think should be an answer also the reason i say that is because all of those things are
included in the definition on one 456 the total definition given for reflex time but then also on
the definition on 155 leaves out the flowing of an effective fire stream so we're left with these two
different definitions and we have to do our best to consolidate these two definitions into something
that makes sense to us that matches with what's on the test all of these answers that have been
discussed are appropriate answers when given that dilemma okay
mr pazano
you thought i forgot about you didn't you
um pretty much the same um argument that i think was made by mr prude uh the definition comes from
page 456 and um and i my appeal is to um have answer c also added to correct answers um the
definition is on 456 uh reflex time total time elapsed from the receipt of the alarm until
effective stream is flowing on the fire and it includes response and setup time and then again
we turn to 155 and and it and it just reiterates that okay thank you question of the appellants
i have a question uh mr johnson and point me specifically to where your your
your answer a the amount of time it takes to board apparatus respond to the fire and
enter the building with proper equipment um where where is your justification coming from again
all right if you look at the definition on page 456 it says reflex time is the total time elapsed
from the receipt of the alarm so you receive an alarm to fire station that's answer d
that's answer d right i'm okay i'm trying to give my justification okay so it's the time it takes
to board the apparatus once you receive that alarm that is after the receipt so that falls
within the parameters of the definition on page 456 you have to also respond to the building
and enter the building with the proper equipment that also falls within the parameters of the
definition on page 456 and that's also reiterated on the definition in the definition from page 155
so my answer of a that i put all of the stuff within that answer falls in those definitions
okay any other questions i have a question uh of the department please
we aren't there yet oh i'm sorry you're so impatient anyone else have questions for the appellant
all right just so i can understand uh so the says alarm time until effective stream is flowing on
the fire that does not mean that's when y'all start that's when the stream starts right that's
not that the fire is under control yet is that right thank you okay fire response um any other
i'm good okay fire response we suggest you accept answers c and d are the only correct answers answer
d is correct and is stated directly in the book as stated in two appeals page 155 states that it
takes to respond to the building and set up operations is very close to answer c answer a
is not correct because it simply states enter the building it does not refer to setting up
fire operations or flowing water so your recommendation is to accept c and d yes sir
okay so here's my here's my devil's advocate on page 155 it says reflex time that it so that is
um that it takes to respond to the building and set up for operation it doesn't say start the stream
on 155 that's why we'd voted to accept answer c commissioner it's answer a that we did not accept
i understand that but i'm making a i'm making an argument that you should accept a because on page
155 it says that it takes to respond uh that it takes to respond so reflex time that it takes to
respond to the building and set up for operations you're saying the reason you didn't accept a is
because this it's only saying entering but it's with proper equipment yes so it excludes the time
it actually takes to set up that equipment the time it takes for me to get from the first floor
to the fourth floor tie into the standpipe charge my hose line and actually be set up for fire
operations is excluded from answer a okay you're saying that didn't see the amount of time to
respond and get to the fire location yes the fire location is on the fourth floor not at the front
door to get to the fire location but where's your setup i'm on c commissioner prado go ahead and make
your recommendation we accept a c and d second just took over my meeting
and the only reason so the only reason i was saying not b is because b says to the that the
fire is under control that was my question for does the it was when the big is it when you begin
when the stream begins or when it's controlled so c b is the only one that shouldn't be accepted i
make a motion that we accept ac well commissioner we wouldn't open the fire stream at the entry of
the building we're going to open the fire stream when we get to the fire location it might be it
might be on the 10th floor so that time it takes a fire company to get to the 10th floor is excluded
from answer a yeah i think that's splitting hairs i just still make a motion that we accept that's
that's a lot of time i mean that takes a fire company a lot of time to go from the first floor
to the 10th floor we're talking possibly five minutes or more
that it takes to respond to the building and set up for operations
do you do any setup whenever you get to the whenever you get to the fire and you're on the
first floor you guys are just pulling up is there any setup that you do downstairs before you go up
to the 10th floor where the first arriving fire company goes to the fire floor and then they set
up for fire attack on the fire so there's nothing that you can do on the floor there's nothing that
you do right when you drive up well we're going to talk we're going to talk to people and stuff
like that but we're not we're not deploying hose lines or those kinds of we're going to take all
of our tools and all of our equipment to the fire floor where the actual fire is to actually
put water on the fire
i mean the the kind of core concept of this is the fact that it takes all that additional time
to get to the fire because it is 10 stories up five stories up
okay so can i have the appellate can you respond to that why are you saying that we should still
accept a then if now that he's explained that but there's no right when you guys arrive there's no
setup there so and it does say in the book even on page 155 it is saying that it takes to respond
to the building and set up for operations and from what i'm understanding there is no setup
when you drive up there's only setup when you get to the actual place i would love to know
i would love to respond to that the fire is happening yeah i would love to respond to that
any high rise uh fire that you pull up to there is going to be set up when you initially pull up on
that scene how are you going to get water to that stand pipe if you don't have setup time to get
your hose connected from your engine to that stand pipe to support that sprinkler system there is a
lot of setup that takes place not only at the fire floor but that also takes place at the ground
level when you pull up so for him to say there's no setup when you first pull up that's not an
accurate statement okay so now i think everybody's agreed that we should include c and d so we're
trying to decide should a be included in that so the amount of time that it takes to board apparatus
okay respond to the building and enter the building with proper equipment correct but his say he's
saying that to enter the building with proper equipment i'm still gonna latch on another five
ten minutes to set up before i before water can start flowing that's right right it depends on
where the fire is that i understand what he's saying but i also understand that there is setup
that takes place not only at the ground or fire floor but at the ground floor as well
so included everything that i told you um that falls within the parameters of that definition
is involved in answer a it all comes straight out of that definition of reflex time and there is
setup that takes up once you that uh there is setup that takes place once you pull up on scene
it's all all there my issue so then if we're talking about setup to enter the building with
proper equipment i understand that we're gonna need five to more minutes to set up the proper
equipment that i just took in there but then if i look at c the amount of time to respond
and get to the fire location there's no there's nothing in there talking about preparation there
either okay so once you get to that fire location where is the setup time mentioned in answer c
that's my whole point so if i need to also accept a yeah then you have to connect to a
stand pipe once you get to the fire floor so they're set up at both both things so i would
say we either accept a c or d that's one option or we just sustain the key and say d is the only
correct answer we have emotional um is there anyone love would like to speak in opposition
to the appeal mr die
yes sir oh i've just uh there there's obviously one best choice and that's what we were talking
about earlier even in my field there's always a best choice and d is obviously the best choice
there's no argument about it those other ones you can you can fluff it how you want but that's not
the correct answer that that's just my personal opinion that's all here okay mr pruett
yes thank you if we accept a that means that we can grab all of our equipment and just step
right inside the door of the fire building and hope that the fire goes out we're not setting up
getting prepared ready to fight fire we're just okay let's take our equipment in we're done that
it doesn't work that way and um so that's all i want to say so you see my concern is that then
then because if you're making that rationale for a then i can make that rationale also for c the
amount of time to respond and get to the fire location so that means i don't even have to take
my equipment down i can just get to the location and it's going to go away so so with that rational
my my thinking is still then why did the department why the department saying that we can accept c and
d so my only thing is if we're accepting c we accept a or we just say d and not accept the fire
department's recommendation to accept c and d but my input is this d would probably be my preferred
choice however if you go to to page 155 you you you have the language there in c but also if you're
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
very good
okay motion is on the floor is to accept a c and d
is there any discussion
yes well the clock starts when the alarm comes in the clock stops when the fire
start when we start putting out the fire i think d is the only correct answer
i disagreed with the with the fire response when i when i read this question
i've done that before but i to me that's the and it includes all of these other things i mean the
real the the real issue is putting putting water on the fire when the hose is flowing
and that's where the the stopwatch stops the reflex watch stops when you start putting water
on the fire whether it's in the front door on the 10th floor or wherever i mean the longer you take
to get to the 10th floor and get set up the more the fire is is going and that's what happens on
that's what he's talking about on 55 is you're giving the fire the advantage but we're really
talking about from beginning to reflex time meaning from the beginning of the of the event
to the time when we start putting the putting water on the fire so
in my estimation d is the only correct answer
call the question okay
motion on the floor is to accept a c and d all in favor say aye
aye opposed aye
motion the the now we accept a c and d for the two to one vote okay next is question 83
and
three appellates
i don't think mr whelan is here mr whelan is here he is not okay uh so we have mr stevenson
and mr pesano mr stevenson
thank you uh again i'm gonna follow everybody else's pattern could you all read the question
for me please
question 83 says blank are those that fall within management prerogative
fill in the blank answers are a prohibited subjects b arbitrary subjects c mandatory subjects d
permissive subjects so again the question says blank are those that fall within management
prerogative the keyed answer is d permissive subjects okay uh i'm just going to go over my
written appeal really quickly i think the question itself is not specific enough and
what it's trying to get the the answer that they have keyed
the originally keyed answer states that permissive subjects are those that
fall within a management prerogative the test question eliminates the word typically
that's used in the source book the use of the word typically implies that permissive subjects
fall within a management prerogative most of the time but not always it's on the same page
in the source material as the answer was derived um prohibited subjects which is answer a it says
management is permitted to unilaterally change a prohibited subject without having to negotiate
and if you can unilaterally change something it is clearly within your prerogative to change it
so i know what the answer that they were looking for and if they had just added a couple words to
the test question they could have gotten it down to that but with the answer or the question the
way it's written i feel like that both those answers are acceptable answers that's all i've
got you mean with the addition of the word typically no so if they so if something is
within your prerogative you may decide or you can absolutely decide so the typically thing that kind
of i wrote that in the appeal that kind of takes you off topic but i guess what i'm trying to say
is that if something is a prohibited subject then it is always within their prerogative
not just typically does that make sense
and so i think they should accept both answers
permissive subjects and prohibited subjects because they are always
both of those are within management prerogative
okay let's let's go into the other appellants mr pazano
um i for for my appeal i pretty much um use the same argument that um clint just used
basically i think the hang up there was the management prerogative
gives you the idea that um management is permitted to change those um whether they want or
don't want to and just the paragraph right before it management is permitted to unilaterally change
a prohibited subject subject and that's why um i my appeal is to accept um the other answer as well
um okay mr mr whelan's appeal is basically the same thing today page 339 it reads
management is permitted to unilaterally change a prohibited subject without first having to
negotiate that is management's prerogative prohibited subjects is one of the answers
it should be correct in addition to d
now other questions other questions
hearing none
fire response
but to sustain the key this question must be read carefully the question states blank are those that
fall within management prerogative fall within the management prerogative is the key to the
question these four words mean that managing management has the right to negotiate a specific
subject and they can choose to engage in negotiations or not to engage in negotiations
for a specific subject answer a is not correct because managed management does not have the right
to negotiate these subjects even if they wanted to b and c are not even asked to be considered
answer d is the only correct answer because permissive subjects both sides have the prerogative
to engage in negotiations or not management and the bargaining unit must both both must agree to
negotiate on a subject it is also both sides prerogative to say that they do not want to
negotiate or on specific permissive subjects questions of fire
could you give me an example of a prohibited subject
i cannot give you one off the top of my head commissioner without
knowing for sure so i would i wouldn't want to speculate or miss misspeak
okay then permissive subjects i didn't tell you that either commissioner this is not my expertise
an attorney in the house they can tell us
your attorney shaking her head
well this one without doing additional research i don't want to um i don't i don't want to speak
on this one i would have to look into this one because i think it needs to be based on the
resource test materials that has been provided so okay then i'll i'll i'll put out a uh an sos
does anybody know what the top are that are considered permissive excuse me uh and then
those that are considered prohibited i see a hand there i don't think that was a hand to
answer your question was it clint mine's not but i mean i could probably give you some examples but
i'd have to have i don't have the book in front of me but i could probably give you some examples
when it says there's certain things that are legally prohibited from from bargaining and
those are things that are you know exclusive to management rights like uh for instance if we use
our fire department um one of the things might be that the battalion chief at his discretion
can take an apparatus out of service right um for training well that might not be something that is
that we would bargain about and i'm i'm just throwing that out there because it's within
manage management's prerogative to decide what the daily staffing is that's not something that
we negotiate and in our meet and confer contract say that we will have you know 43 people on duty
every day that's based on what the city has budgeted for how many fte's they have and all that
so it's more of an economic thing the city has certain exclusive rights that they can change
and they can make changes without having to negotiate on it
if you read those top three uh paragraphs just right under the scope of bargaining i mean i think
that's everything that mr students engine said my thing is is it's to me it's pretty cut and clear
um where where on page 338 at the very bottom where it talks about prohibited subjects
prohibited subjects are those that the parties are prohibited from bargaining over
and bargaining to me just isn't is the same as the management prerogative is it not so if it's
saying that that they're not even allowed to do that consider a you're on page 339 338 338 excuse
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
feel like we're inferring some things into this because you're reading it in the section in context
but if you just read the question itself does it mention bargaining or negotiation what is okay what
is management prerogative what does that define us is that bargain is that not the right to be able to
bargain without having to go to collective bargaining i would say management prerogative
would be a decision that management can make right that they're having to go anywhere else so is that
not the same as the scope of bargaining i guess i'm not clear on what on what you're saying i'm
saying that bargaining and negotiation are not in the question so you would have to if it the
question doesn't say as as applies in bargaining or in the on the matter of collective bargaining
what or whatever that would be one thing but when it doesn't say that and it just says blank
following in management prerogative
that would be they can do whatever they want in two areas permissive they can decide to do
whatever they want and in the uh prohibited they can do whatever they want okay because it's saying
that it can't so i'm reading it's so on page 339 typically permissive subjects are those that fall
within a management prerogative management may but is not required to bargain over a permissive
subject they may but they don't have to however if an agreement is reached so when you're asking me
where am i getting bargaining that's where i'm getting it from this whole section of permissive
and prohibitive subjects are is under the subheading of scope of bargaining so am i understanding that
wrong uh to skipper that to be to fund management prerogative that's giving the management
the option to bargain yes we have the option to say yes or no and then i would and the more i'm
thinking about this i would consider a prohibited subject like we don't have the ability to negotiate
over title seven chapter seven civil rights act you know we don't we can't we can't negotiate with
the union to say we only want to hire you know women from now on that's a prohibited subject
right but you are able to on wages hours and other terms of employment which is on page 338
when it starts to define the scope of bargaining and further down when it talks about prohibited
subjects these are the subjects that you are not allowed to bargain for any for either side right
so then how can under management prerogative how can prohibitive subjects fall under management
prerogative you don't have the management doesn't have the right to bargain under those
so it cannot a cannot be right so the question the whole umbrella is collective progress
the scope of bargaining so bargaining versus collective bargaining right this the subject
excuse me the scope of subjects that may or must be discussed during collective bargaining
in the public sector is defined initially in the labor relations act and refined by court decisions
so we're talking collective bargaining here but the question doesn't raise the issue of negotiation
or bargaining i mean it's simply it's simply asking about the essence the definition
of which subjects are left to management without negotiation negotiation is not a part of it and
the only one that's not specifically under negotiation are the permissive subjects
the others require negotiation
agreed agreed agreed
but when you look at the appeals though the appeals are are making a point for
prohibited subjects yeah but the book clearly states that those are not
prohibitive subjects are those that parties are prohibited from bargaining over that includes
management okay so if the book clearly states that a is not an option then we have to go with
what's there yeah a long way to get here but i'm just trying to make sure that yeah you know man
motion that we sustain the key i'll second um i need to i need to go one other place first
then hold that hold that motion um is there anyone like to speak in opposition to the appeal
mr pruent i know you raised your hand do you have something
salient and and clear clarifying to say no that was from earlier when someone asked if there were
any examples okay i thought there were in the book in appendix b but i couldn't find any okay all
right we just want it we do you raised your hand so we want to acknowledge okay now you can make
your motion commissioners okay i motion that we sustain the key i'll second
i hesitantly say is there any discussion
okay hearing none all in favor of sustaining the key to 83 say aye
aye you never know when you ask that question anymore all right next is 87
and there are three appeals is that correct okay
and none of them are great you got to listen to me read all three of them all right so questions
the first line of defense against a fire in a building is blank ensuring that the building
meets proper building specifications b an automatic fire protection system c first responding fire
department company d completing a thorough and accurate pre-fire plan and building inspection
um
all right make sure i'm in it all right one of the one of the appellants says uh the question
implies all buildings with a says that b is also is the key to answer b is not correct a is the
correct answer uh the question implies all buildings with a fire in the book it states an automatic
fire protection system especially an automatic sprinkler system is the first line of defense
in many buildings does not say all buildings what if the building does not have a sprinkler system
and it's up to the cons to the construction and specs of the building to be its first line of
defense another appeal says uh page 23 says automatic fire protection system is the first
line of defense in many buildings not all all buildings have to meet building specs not all
buildings have sprinklers installed only about half and wait a minute that's one of that's another
appeal all right where am i
okay thank you um not all buildings have fire protection systems my home does not most homes
do not homes or buildings any of the answers could be correct based on the type of building
if the question said a building with an automatic automated fire protection system
then the answer would be b since it is a general building any answer could be correct
those are the three appeals that have been read in uh fire response
we chose to accept a and b the question leaves out the keyword many so it is not 100 accurate
an automatic fire protection system can be anything from a simple smoke detector to a
fire sprinkler system since b is not 100 correct the argument can be made that a is fairly correct
also as referenced throughout the chapter c is not mentioned and d while it is mentioned
in the chapter i think it is a stretch to be considered a first line of defense
questions commissioners i have no questions
okay anyone like to speak in opposition to the appeal is that you mr pruett
yes thank you i don't know if it's in opposition could could you please reread the question
once again the first line of defense against a fire in a building is
a ensuring that the building meets proper building specifications b
an automated fire protection system c the first responding fire department company
and d completing a thorough and accurate pre-fire plan and building inspection
thank you very much no further comment
any other questions commissioner i would in i would entertain a motion
i move that we accept uh a and b
one second any discussion
all in favor say aye aye opposed
next last is question 92
on is mr miller there he is yes sir um on this appeal we're in uh
building construction for the spider service and i wanted to point out um first of all i guess
if you could just read the question and the answers into the record
sure which of the following statements is true conceal spaces are permitted between structural
members in type three construction conceal spaces are permitted between structural members in type
four construction conceal spaces are permitted between structural members in both type three
and type four and d conceal spaces are permitted between structural members in neither type three
nor four construction yes sir uh my answer that the uh there are concealed spaces in type three
and type four construction um in the book if you'll look at uh page 145
there's a title called ceilings
i'll get to why i'm going here first and underneath the bullet points it reads
ceiling materials can be directly but can be attached directly to the underside of roof joists
or trusses or they can be installed at a distance beneath the roof supporting roof supports creating
a considerable concealed space so i just wanted to point out that uh there are they can be the
ceilings can be attached directly to the trusses or the roof joists which are structural members
if we'll go now to uh page 206
there's an information box here it has the purple eye on it and it says heavy timber mill construction
and rather than just read through the whole thing if we drop down to the last paragraph
it says the advantages of mill construction can be significantly lessened when a building when a
mill building undergoes a change of occupancy many older mill style buildings have been converted to
residential occupancies which results in subdivision of floor space into residential units these
divisions can be lead to the creation of sealed concealed spaces when partitions and ceilings
are installed in individual units and that's why i went to ceilings a moment ago because this
specifically calls out when those are added now you have built spaces and the way that
the paragraph under ceilings talked about the way it was attached and you directly attach that to a
floor joist or a structural element now you have a penetration and that's a concealed space
i do know that i agree with the keyed answer but i believe my answer is correct also based on this
information box i believe that uh if we look and see why we even have this information box
on page three at the front of the book it tells us why they even put these in here
um it says uh information boxes give facts that are complete in themselves but belong
with the text discussion it is information that needs more emphasis or separation in the text the
title will give you the change and reflected content but it needs more emphasis so the author
of the book put this information box in here to give us more emphasis on this type of construction
and specifically in this box it tells you that concealed spaces are allowed and that exists in
our city now because a lot of these buildings it says many older mill style buildings because
those are older they've been renovated a lot of them are residences a lot of them are just uh
commercial buildings we do have them here in town and we permit for them excuse me so they are
allowed and we go out and inspect these and when they are renovated those structural members now
have concealed spaces between them and that's my point for the answer i chose based on the
information box here so just to be clear you're saying that
answer a is not then that's the key dancer is not correct but answer c
i.e. including both type three and type four construction is correct is that is that correct
i know i went back and forth on how i was going to key this as you can see on my field marked out
because i didn't know if i'm going to look at this at best answer then what you just said i
would say yes to because you can't the author doesn't want us walking away from this book
believing there are no concealed spaces in that type of construction you can't pull up on that
type of construction recognize it when it says abc apartments outside and think there are no
concealed spaces in there and the author doesn't want you taking that away from here and that's
why this information box is in there i believe that answer is actually probably the best answer
from a safety standpoint we have to know this um i do see where a is in there
okay other questions for the appellant
i guess i'm a little confused because on page 49 i mean on the bullet
under the type four construction it clearly says that they're not permitted
so i understand what you're saying they do but the book says they're not permitted
yes ma'am says which of the following statements is true and all of them use the word permitted
not that they don't exist so this is another this is another example of of your your knowledge that
you know because you're out there you're living it every day and you see it versus what the book
says that about without them being permitted question here not about what you do every day
but but well what the book says yes ma'am i don't see a lot of wiggle room on that
yes ma'am that's another reason i chose my answer is the only answer is because of that uh it kind
of there is a little what would appear to be some contradiction it tells you that they're there so
as the fire prevention and the building department we do permit for renovations and that's when those
drop ceilings come in as it talks about in this information box we issue permits that allow that
to happen it's not just uh based on my personal experience that i've described but we do permit
for this we permit for these type of renovations or remodeling in this type of construction and
when they do it now you have that concealed space so you guys are doing something because it's not
permitted to happen that's what i that's why i chose my answer as being the correct one
and we're going back to you we're going back to what's the source material that we have to look at
yes ma'am all i read all i just quoted to you was written in this book
uh our response let's our other questions
we can come back to we can come back to that too so john i was waiting on fire response
okay fire response vote to sustain the key the answer is stated in the book
so uh chief skipper in light of the information that the other officer
brought forward about that we have some situations that are not permitted but yet they exist
how do we how do we how do we take that into consideration in preparing for an examination
like this it's a good question commissioner i don't have any arguments about any of his points made
right i mean but but i do because you're saying that the answers come from the books
come from this material not from experience not from background knowledge not from outside source
material not from other classes that i might have taken at another college that have to do with fire
it says it has to come just from the book so
yes ma'am but he was asking he was asking as far as reality that commissioner baines i took that
question is that but as far as jeb's points i don't have any arguments against him but do i
say i still stick with sustain the key because that's the answer stated in the book
as far as the departmental perspective
i guess my one question to jeb would be this if i was going to build a type four construction
building from scratch we're not changing occupancy we're not we're not renovating
would i be permitted to have void spaces permitted to have that as long as it's done correct
no you wouldn't but the uh the question doesn't draw out if it would have sent new construction
or in its original form it's an original built time i would agree with the chief that you'd have
to stop right there but it doesn't say that it leaves it open and that leaves it open to
what the information box tells us that many of them are renovated and now there's concealed spaces
if the question would have would have said hey brand new now look at it originally right now
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
of the book and definitions i can't find it yet in the book but it has the definition for building
permit so when i was talking about what we do in the city it's actually in this book uh says uh
authorization issued from approved authority having jurisdiction before any new construction
addition renovation operation or demolitions of buildings or structures so that's why i was
getting uh me seeing and knowing that there's permits issued it actually has it in this book
no i believe it i just have an issue with y'all are doing something that's probably not best
practice that's probably number one other two is just the wording it's if what's happened what's
actually happening but then what in theory is supposed to be the right thing which is that
they're not supposed to have that they're not supposed to have permitted concealed spaces are
not permitted uh these structural components for construction i understand i'm just to to make a
to make the best possible answer i know and what we've been saying all along which is we need to
follow what's in the source material and to meet with other people's rulings that we've you know
said yes or no to on on questions that have been appealed today i'm trying to be consistent and to
look at what's in the book i understand the difference between book and reality i completely
get that and i know that that's frustrating but just because it happens doesn't mean that it's
that it's permitted well that's like saying murder is not permitted does it happen of course it does
in reality is it permitted no it's not permitted exactly in 206 under that information
section that you cited jeb it says um i can find it now many old old older mill style buildings have
been converted to residential occupancies which results in the um creation of concealed spaces
when petitions and ceilings are installed in individual units period end of sentence
it doesn't bring in
permitted and that's where so yeah so permission permission to do it is another decision that's
not talked about in the book the book doesn't talk about permitting concealed spaces in type
four construction that's what the word converted in order to convert it you have to get a building
permit and that's where i read the definition in the back where building permit is in this book
and it talks about renovations and remodels in here and i somewhere in this book it talks about
building permitting as well i believe it's this one but definitely that definition in the back
wouldn't be in here if we didn't talk about building permits and that's where they get
the permission to convert as you just read these occupancies
i i think that the information that's why the author has that in there so we will know that
and actually the building the building permit department is where they'll get the permission
do you think the department would be willing to accept c seen as how you all as a department
actually do issue these permits the department will not change its stance
and why do you all issue the permits
that's for another time mr stevenson did you have a question or comment mr stevenson
yes sir are we ready to speak in opposition to the appellant yes we're ready for that so the
only thing i'll say is um real world versus practice obviously two different things
the whole point of building construction classification is just to
in these books is to show you the dangers one building versus another building and one of the
things with the heavy timber construction is is that they don't have concealed spaces
so that makes them safer whereas the type three buildings they do have concealed spaces so i think
that's that's where the questions come from that's the answer they're trying to draw out
i don't permitted meaning not building permit but allowed i think and i think if you
get a building permit to alter a mill type construction building to something else then
you no longer have your mill type your mill type four building you have a hybrid building
now with two different construction types on top of each other i thought that thank you
can i speak to that sure that's not necessarily true can be but not necessarily
with drop ceilings you still have the structural elements of that type four building
regardless of that renovation and on page 15 if there is a section on building permits it
just tells you that before a permit is issued the proposed design must meet applicable building code
provisions so they will they will permit this to happen because we permit renovations and that's
what the information box is getting at converted means renovated or remodeled changing it and they
have to have permission to do that but a type four building when it's initially built has no concealed
spaces correct yes sir okay question doesn't stop there
it's asking you what's true and type three allows it and type four as the information
box tells us also allows those spaces and legally with building permits it's permitted
commissioners i would entertain a motion
my mic not working
i'll i'll go for it i'll make sure that we accept a and c
i'll second
okay discussion
i have no
okay ready to vote all in favor the motion is to accept a and c all in favor say aye opposed
aye motion carries to accept a and c
ladies and gentlemen we have reached the end of the appointed uh appeals
um as i said earlier i'm going to say it again uh you guys put in a lot of work
you put in a lot of work on a daily basis i live out by station six and i hear the
i hear the ambulance and the fire truck go out a lot so i know you i know you work hard every
day but you take it upon yourselves to go that extra step and try to memorize all the material
and a whole bunch of heavy books and um better yourself and be better for our community and
trust me when i say that we appreciate that you're willing to go that extra mile to do those things
to make yourself better but also to make us safer that in and of itself says volumes about your
commitment to the job that you do and i want to thank you for that uh you're you're going in
places that i wouldn't want to go so uh thank you so much for doing that i hope you will continue
i know that you may not be happy with us in some ways we're probably not happy with ourselves
completely either but um it's the process that we go through uh and until we come up with a better
process which we're going to continually try to do um hence our session in the middle of the meeting
and subsequent follow-ups to that um we're going to do the best we can do to try to be fair to you
and give you every benefit of the doubt but at the same time uh keep the integrity of of the
process going so but most of all thank you so much for all you do for us and and leading your
your folks and in striving to better yourselves so thank you very much
thank you thank you all too just for everybody that put uh all the information into your appeals it
makes it so much easier for us because even when i'm reading through them on my own and i'm looking
through the book i really do need y'all's input so i appreciate the people that take time to walk us
through and explain and make their points and justify that a lot thanks to everyone for all
their hard work their scholarship and their dedication i'm privileged to be a part of the
process and i hope that we contributed significantly and have a great day thank you yes thank you all
um we've reached the end of the agenda uh so i would entertain a motion unless there is
anything else i would entertain a motion that we adjourn at 1 32
a motion that we adjourn thank you is there a second thank you all in favor of adjourning say
aye aye thank you all thank you all so much have a great day stay safe