The Sub Burndown

Saturday December 26, 2015



Section 1
- The Sub Fire -


6 Minutes With The Arsonist
Incendiary #1 — The timeline of initial events that sparked suspicion of arson.
Keep reading →
Fire Investigation Never Done
Cover-up of The Sub Fire started two days later…
Keep reading →
SLO City FD Failure to Evacuate
Clearing the building and ensuring nobody is inside - a crucial step neglected by the SLO City FD.
Keep reading →
No R.I.T. or F.A.S.T Crew Assigned
BC-1 Berryman not only did not assign a R.I.T./F.A.S.T. crew, he put his command post where the fire did eventually burn to…
Keep reading →
The Sub Fire Load & Interior Details
Store inventory and layout tells a different tale...
Keep reading →
Sub Roof Details
The Sub and SDRS had a complete recent earthquake upgrade...to achieve a one-hour Class A roof fire rating.
Keep reading →
Seven Paths To Enter & Fight The Fire At The Sub
The Sub was unique in how many ways it would have been easy to fight a fire.
Keep reading →
Burning A Building Down Is Not Firefighting
You can't put a structure fire out with chainsaws.
Keep reading →
Unknown Incendiary Device #2
Our assertion is that all evidence points to UID #2, having been ignited on top of The Sub.
Keep reading →
See How the Fire Moved Through the Structures
Above: check

SLO City FD Underground "Burndown" Policy

Our extensive research has revealed to us that SLO City FD leadership seems to have an underground policy of refusing to go into buildings that are on fire.

After 911 and the tragic death of so many brave first responders (who rushed into the Twin Towers), some fully unionized, and highly paid, Fire Departments that fight very few fires, and have very little actual experience, secretly decided THEY were too valuable to risk going into buildings that were on fire. So they state they go into buildings, but they don’t or, at least, try not to! – This is a Leadership problem that negatively affects the entire community

Non-defensible equals burndown:

"Non-defensible structures" is a term SLO City FD leadership seems to love. If it’s a building that might require skill, expertise, and limited risk to fight the fire, it appears that they simply refuse to consider trying. Instead, they label it "non-defensible". They arrive quickly, delay taking action, then cut holes in roofs but do not do the interior attack that goes with the vertical ventilation that they promptly do.

No building/fire is non-defensible if you catch the fire quick!

No building/fire is non-defensible if you have prepared a plan in advance and have properly trained personnel enabling you to act quickly.

All buildings are lost if you refuse to try. No building is defensible if you won't go inside to fight the fire. SLO City FD appears to believe, "Look how big and quickly it all burned, proving our decision to fight a defensive fire was correct." A self-fulfilling prediction, considering that SLO City FD leadership is often intentionally making the fire burn hotter and more intensely.

When reviewing The Sub and Square Deal Recordings & Supplies fire, which SLO City FD leadership claims to have fought defensively, we feel they have redefined defensive from staying outside the building and stopping the fire by putting maximum water through doors and windows TO cutting draft holes in the roof (intensifying and enlarging the fire), then putting fire hoses through ventilation openings to add air to the fire - (No interior attack being considered). They do water for show on roofs and walls but they do nothing to slow the fire down or put it out. They protect nearby properties which are not on fire, but not the involved structure or one attached, even defensively. In our case, they totally refused to defend the adjoining structures.

After four requests with no meaningful response, we learned the correct term, "target hazard". When we asked for a list of target hazards, we were given a list of 88 buildings consisting of public facilities, large occupancies, and a few large firms. They were all sprinklered buildings!

There still is no list of actual target hazard buildings that are not sprinklered. All the real hazards will be in NON-sprinklered buildings.

If it’s a building that might require skill, expertise, and limited risk to fight the fire, it appears that they simply refuse to consider trying. Instead, they label it "non-defensible." They arrive quickly, delay taking action, then cut holes in roofs but do not do the interior attack that goes with the vertical ventilation that they promptly do.

SLO City FD leadership apparently maintains a secret unofficial list of properties that they will not fight fires on or where it would be difficult and they should have pre-prepared plans but have not! (We have asked through public record requests for any list of dangerous/high fire load/non-defensible/non-savable and target hazard buildings, and they only have a list of 88 buildings with sprinklers installed – not very hazardous!) The property owners deserve to know if SLO City FD leadership will not fight a fire in their buildings so they can attempt other firefighting arrangements. They are supposed to maintain a list of problem structures (target hazards) and have plans to deal with them – not a list consisting of only sprinklered buildings.

So far, with three different public records requests, SLO City FD leadership still has not produced any other list. Yet, during commercial inspections at Square Deal, firemen have commented to the property owners and managers that they will not fight a fire in their building anyway – This is not a comment they would have the confidence to make without having seen a list or know of a policy that SLO City FD leadership does not admit to. It could even be worse, i.e. perhaps only the 88 sprinklered structures on the target hazard list will get firefighting service?!!

The insurance companies would want to know!

The neighbors of buildings which are not eligible for actual firefighting would want to know.

Property owners would expect written notices of the problems that disqualify them from fire protection so they could try to fix the problems.

Square Deal Recordings & Supplies and The Sub passed all their fire inspections and deserved fire service and an honest attempt to save the buildings.

San Luis Obispo and all citizens deserve better.

Section 2
- Square Deal Recordings & Supplies (SDRS) Fire -


The Sub Office Fire Proves Fire Did Not Come into Front of SDRS from The Sub through the Firewall Between the Two Businesses

The Sub/ SDRS Corp.© stands to prove the fire did not come into front of SDRS through the firewall of The Sub
Keep reading →
Unknown Incendiary Device #3 in SDRS

How did the fire go from The Sub to the front of Square Deal Recordings & Supplies when the fire was out in the portion of The Sub adjoining the front of Square Deal before the fire started in the front of Square Deal?
Keep reading →
SDRS Fire Load Notes

The SLO City FD leadership has repeatedly stated we had a huge fire load at Square Deal Recordings & Supplies. This is relatively untrue and totally untrue from the perspective of the two hours they had to stop the fire that was not yet in our building or prevent it from entering Square Deal.
Full document →
11 Basic Stop Points for Preventing Fire Spread into SDRS from Rear

11 basic stop points for preventing fire spread into Square Deal Recordings & Supplies from the rear (Pismo Street)
Full document →
Hole Map Illustration

Holes cut by members of SLO City FD and incendiary devices placed by unknown person(s)
Full document →

Section 3
- San Luis Obispo City Fire Department (SLO City FD) Issues -


SLOCF Fire Calls 2009-2016
History of success rate in San Luis Obispo fires.
Full document →
SLOCF Press Release Corrections
These are what we believe to be factual corrections to SLOCF Chief Garret Olson's press release…
Full document →
Bravest Act or a Cowardly, Evil Act?
Cutting holes in roofs is something firemen do but most civilians can't tell...
Full document →
Is BC-1 Berryman an Arsonist?
In evaluating the actions of Berryman, we have come to the following realizations...
Full document →
Total Destruction is a Job Well Done
Total destruction considered a job well done because no fireman was injured.
Full document →
SLOCF Fails to Follow Own Rules
We will state the appropriate rule from the current SLOCF manual and then what SLOCF actually did.
Full document →
SLOCF Underground "Burndown" Policy
SLOCF leadership seems to have an underground policy of refusing to go into buildings that are on fire.
Full document →
Is SLOCF Corrupt?
While none of these indicators singularly means corruption, a Fire Department guilty of most of these practices is certainly suspect, if not corrupt.
Full document →
How Can You Believe…?
Fire departments who fight few fires do not easily gain experience... There are three ways to deal with this…
Full document →

NEXT STORY

Read more



Is SLO City FD a Corrupt Fire Department?

Having spent the past year studying and investigating Fire Department policies, practices, and procedures after SLOFD leadership burned down The Sub and Square Deal Recordings & Supplies, we have come up with the following concerns and conclusions:

What does it mean to be a corrupt Fire Department? – While none of these indicators singularly means corruption, a Fire Department guilty of most of these practices is certainly suspect, if not corrupt.

"Corrupt" for a Fire Department essentially means they serve themselves first and not the public or their community.

Corrupt means they no longer attempt to put out building fires and save property. It means they cut a hole in center of roof for a focused and accelerated fire, and a quick safe burndown. It sacrifices the victim but is safe for firemen and usually protects adjoining property.

Corrupt means they stop training to actually put out fires and save property.

Obvious signs of corruption:

  1. A corrupt Fire Department has leadership that is not honest about what it does or how it does it.
  2. A corrupt Fire Department is worried only about firefighter safety, pay, and benefits not citizens’ property, possessions, or valuables.
  3. A corrupt Fire Department lives off the hard work, courage, and discipline justly earned by legitimate Fire Departments who do go inside buildings and fight fires.
  4. A corrupt Fire Department has firemen who do not know that their first priority (after firefighter safety) is to put water on the fire as fast as possible – even ladder trucks, if they are first on scene at a fire can deploy a preconnect to fight the fire instead of just waiting.
  5. A corrupt Fire Department will have meetings before the leadership writes their narratives to co-ordinate what is written to insure there are not "differences." They are supposed to write narrations independently as soon after the fire as possible then have meetings to go over the fire. (A super corrupt Fire Department will stop writing narratives entirely.)
  6. A corrupt Fire Department will actually claim credit for firefighting it did not do!
  7. A corrupt Fire Department does not prioritize putting water on a fire promptly. Often they delay putting water on the fire to have a better fire.
  8. A corrupt Fire Department will generate lots of overtime without any firefighting emergencies. They will also deflect questions asking about unnecessary overtime incurred.
  9. A corrupt Fire Department has leadership that serves itself and not its community, but always loudly and proudly proclaims the opposite.
  10. A corrupt Fire Department will claim credit for cutting holes in roofs to let the smoke and hot gases out but will neglect to tell you they are not supposed to cut holes in roofs except as part of a coordinated interior attack. (The hole accelerates and focuses the fire – It increases the heat and gases!)
  11. A corrupt Fire Department will allow existing firemen to become paramedics and train on-the-job rather than hiring experienced fully-trained EMTs or paramedics.
  12. A corrupt Fire Department will use its job openings to buy false testimony or other favors from firefighters who want the job the corrupt Fire Department has to offer.
  13. A corrupt Fire Department claims experience and knowledge they do not possess – Then when the knowledge is needed, they fake it at the expense of the fire victims and the community, afterwards lying about what they did to cover their lack of experience, relevant training, and actual expertise.
  14. A corrupt Fire Department requires a Fire Marshal who will not expose misconduct and will participate in any cover-up or glossing over of inappropriate Fire Department practice and behavior.
  15. A corrupt Fire Department follows underground policies that it will not put into print or admit to. Example: Refuse to go into structures that are on fire because "it’s dangerous" but claim the opposite.
  16. A corrupt Fire Department does not follow its own published rules and procedures at fire scenes then afterwards claims to have done what they should have rather than what they actually did.
  17. A corrupt Fire Department will try to generate as many useless activities as possible. This creates the illusion of useful activity when needlessly chasing ambulances only creates dangers, wastes time and money and substitutes for meanful activities that they should be doing.
  18. A corrupt Fire Department thinks following ambulances replaces preparing plans to fight fires in our major public buildings and elsewhere in our community.
  19. A corrupt Fire Department will use plastics and modern materials as an excuse for not rushing in and promptly dealing with a fire.
  20. Plastics burn poorly and emit poisonous gases. With SCUBA equipment, it is no issue of firemen safety. Modern materials and plastics with fire retardant actually create a less dangerous fire scene than previous times and are not an excuse used by actual firefighting Fire Departments.
  21. A corrupt Fire Department will always attack and disparage any person or group who tries to alert the public to the problem with the corrupt Fire Department!


Section 4
- Comments, Observations and Correction on Narratives by SLO City FD -


Preamble to Narratives
The overall situation with the SLOCF narratives is that they seem to be an attempt to cover up gross negligence, professional malfeasance, and cowardice…
Keep reading →
SLOCF Battalion Chief-A Neal Berryman
Comments, Observations, & Corrections on Narrative by SLOCF Battalion Chief-A Neal Berryman
Keep reading →
SLOCF Deputy Chief Jeff Gater
Comments, Observations, & Corrections on Narrative by SLOCF Deputy Chief Jeff Gater
Keep reading →
SLOCF Chief Garret Olson
Comments, Observations, & Corrections on Narrative by SLOCF Chief Garret Olson
Keep reading →
SLOCF Captain Michael King
Comments, Observations, & Corrections on Narrative by SLOCF Captain Michael King
Keep reading →
SLOCF Captain Mark Vasquez
Comments, Observations, & Corrections on Narrative by SLOCF Captain Mark Vasquez
Keep reading →
SLOCF Captain Matt Callahan
Comments, Observations, & Corrections on Narrative by SLOCF Captain Matt Callahan
Keep reading →
SLOCF Captain-Paramedic Station 3A David Marshall
Comments, Observations, & Corrections on Narrative by SLOCF Captain-Paramedic Station 3A David Marshall
Keep reading →