You are on page 1of 3

Additional Questions and comments regarding the answers to the 5/14/18 Plush Family

Questions

We see many reference to improvements in the 5/29 answer packet. Some of these are:
"evaluating purchasing", "SOP change is being prepared", "updating standard operating
procedures", training will be completed by end of this summer", "dispatchers will be
trained", "Standard operating procedures will be updated", Standard operating procedures
will be updated immediately ""Beginning immediately", "Quality review procedures will be
amended", "Quality assurance program is under complete review", "Call takers will receive
additional training", updating standard operating procedures to heighten awareness and
urgency when repeat calls are made from the same number", "Evaluating purchasing
Automatic Police Vehicle Location", "officers will be trained", "will be re-evaluated".

I ask the CPD and City Council that we have timelines attached to all the above references.
These are great steps that are being taken to help improve the emergency response
process.

Further questions and comments to answers provided on 5/29:

4. The answer provided stated the officers weren't sent to the wrong address. They
were sent to 5471 Red Bank road which was the West side of Red Bank road. Why then
were they in a lot on the East side of Red Bank road?

6. Please provide more detail about the Service Now technical support system for the
6/11 City Council meeting.

10. It was stated that "unfortunately in this incident the dispatcher did not complete a
manual card because she thought the information was save by CAD". Please clarify if that
should have said call taker and not dispatcher. Assuming it was the call taker then
according to her quality assurance report completed by Mark Yontz it said " REMINDER:
Always check on attempted process involving technological problems that the process was
completed. “Is it correct to say Call taker #2 did not perform her job correctly in this
instance?

16. It was stated in the answer that the call taker #1 did not hear the sounds of
"banging, screaming, and knocking". Did Dooley or Harris hear any of this during their
review of the call?

17. It was stated the call taker #1 could not hear the phrase I'm going to die hear? Is it
correct that Harris heard "Help I'm going to die" when asked by Magee to review the call?

21. The 2nd call taker is stated as not hearing anything and thought it was a silent call. It
also states that the call audio form the second 911 call was immediately available.
On page 44 of the 5/14 CPD presentation it is stated that Operator Smith heard "Siri, "Siri".
Given she heard "Siri", Siri” wouldn’t that prompt the call taker to immediately play back the
call as Magee did in Call number #1?

27. It is stated in the answer that it is an expectation that when information is relayed
that an individual is stuck in a vehicle, and not immediately observable, that officers leave
the vehicle and visually inspect the area. Did the officers fail to fill the expectation of
getting out of their vehicle on the afternoon of 4/10 when they were told someone was
trapped in a van?

29. The answer provided stated that Call takers and dispatchers do not have the
authority to conclude a call is a prank and all calls are treated with the same level of
seriousness. Did the responding officers violate policy by stating this call was a prank?

30. It was stated in the answer that "Fire vehicles have more equipment to extract
individuals trapped in vehicles. Fire vehicles are also currently equipped with Automatic
Vehicle location and GPS based dispatching system. The option would have allowed the
dispatcher to have know the exact location of the CFD vehicle in relation to the caller.

Why wasn't the CAD updated to reflect the fact that Operator Harris heard "help me I'm
going to die"? Would this have warranted dispatch of Fire and rescue resources?

31. The first 911 call from Kyle was dispatched as a code 2. This is the second highest
response urgency below an officer involved shooting. Did the way the officers responded
match the expectation of a Code 2 classification? Please also explain all the criteria behind
a code 2 classification for the 6/11 meeting.

32. It was stated that had the 1st call taker heard the phrase about dying she could have
changed the priority of the call. In the comments from #30 above it was stated Operator
Harris heard the phrase "Help me I'm going to die". Would that not prompt a priority
change to the call?

Related Interests