The Palisades Fire has become the most destructive fire ever recorded in Los Angeles. As firefighters continue to battle the historic blaze, which was only 19% contained as of the afternoon of Wednesday, Jan. 15, questions about the fire’s origins persist.
According to Los Angeles Fire Department officials and a review of internal documents by the Los Angeles Times, the fire department could have deployed resources to high-risk areas before the fire started. Former fire chiefs and officials said this action would have been within normal protocol given the warnings of high winds and extreme fire conditions prior to the blaze.
The Los Angeles Times reports that some of the resources that could have been deployed include positioning roughly 1,000 firefighters and more than 40 fire engines in high-risk areas.
While commanders did deploy some of those resources to the San Fernando Valley and Hollywood, they did not order firefighters to stay on duty for a second shift as winds were picking up, according to current fire officials.
Additional resources were only called when the fire was “already out of control,” according to fire officials who spoke with the newspaper.
Fire Chief Kristin Crowley defended the decision, saying resources had to be managed strategically to address the city’s broader emergency needs, including a spike in emergency calls due to downed trees and power lines caused by high winds. Crowley argued that the firefighting strategy was sound, given the department’s need to cover extensive ground that day.
As a result, fire engines were left unmanned at their stations. However, when the Palisades Fire broke out, those engines were eventually sent to the front lines.
Former Los Angeles Fire Battalion Chief Rick Crawford said pre-deployment would have been the right call, adding that the city’s current plan for the fire should have been implemented before it started. He described the strategy as a “known staffing tactic” and a “deployment model,” arguing that pre-positioning fire engines could have allowed for the fire to be controlled while it was still small.
Los Angeles Fire Deputy Chief Richard Fields supported Crowley’s position, stating that hindsight is always clearer and that no amount of resources would have prevented the fire’s spread.
As the fire department continues to evaluate its response, the decisions made before the fire have sparked debate over whether more could have been done to prevent the scale of destruction that followed.
Fire officials are not the only ones facing scrutiny. The city’s mayor has been criticized for budget cuts made weeks before the fire. Additionally, the Los Angeles Water Department is facing a lawsuit from individuals who lost their homes and businesses in the Palisades Fire, citing empty hydrants and reservoirs.
