Laserfiche WebLink
I L • . ry t.� <br />CITY OF NORTH OLMSTED <br />"TOGETHER WE CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE!" <br />SPECIAL CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION MEETING <br />MINUTES — JULY 30, 2003 <br />COUNCIL'S CAUCUS ROOM <br />8:30 A.M. <br />I. ROLL CALL: <br />Chairman Thomay called the meeting to order at 8:39 a.m. <br />PRESENT: Chairman J. Thomay and Board Member R. Giesser. <br />ALSO PRESENT: Assistant Law Director O'Malley, Safety Director R. Jesse, and Civil Service <br />Secretary D. Rote. <br />II. DISPOSITION OF MINUTES: <br />IIT. CORRESPONDENCE: <br />There were (5) pieces of correspondence received and (4) pieces of correspondence sent out. <br />Mr. O'Malley questioned if the clerk received any additional correspondence since the agenda was <br />released. Mrs. Rote indicated that since the agenda was released two candidates reviewed the <br />Assistant Fire chiefs testing documents and three protests have been filed. The protests were faxed <br />to the testing company with a request for a response and a copy of the protests filed have been <br />forwarded to the Law Department for their review. Mr. O'Malley felt that the responses should be <br />received in time for the next regularly scheduled meeting. Mrs. Rote indicated the last candidate <br />would be reviewing the testing documents on 8/1/03. Mr. O'Malley reminded the clerk that the <br />protests are to be anonymous and the less said the better. <br />J. Thomay motion to approve the correspondences as submitted. R. Giesser seconded the <br />motion, which was unanimously approved. <br />IV. OLD BUSINESS: <br />V. NEW BUSINESS: <br />Address communication from testing company regarding Assistant Fire Chief results <br />Mr. Thomay reviewed that the testing company submitted a letter regarding the testing scores. The <br />letter explains that there was only 110 questions and the raw scores were calculated at 120 questions <br />by accident. Once the recalculations were calculated to the 110 questions it was found that the <br />positioning of the candidates remained the same however each of the candidates scores are higher <br />then first calculated. Mrs. Ramsey further states that in the 25 years of business this is the first time <br />this mistake has ever happened. The correct scores are as follows; Ranked (1) Edward Robertson, <br />final score 99.63% (2) Timothy Gut, final score 97.67%, and (3) Donald Swan with a final score of <br />95.73%. See chart below; <br />