The Los Angeles Fires: an analysis

Beginning January 7, 2025, a fire broke out in the Pacific Palisades neighborhood of LA. Strong Santa Ana winds, cresting over mountains in the east, spurred the fire into a rapid expansion that local firefighters were ill-equipped to combat. The fire reached nearby affluent neighborhoods, destroying billions of dollars’ worth of homes and other assets. Another fire soon broke out, in the hills near Altadena, which was also quickly blown into surrounding neighborhoods. Numerous commercial institutions, such as Aldi and Bank of America, have also burned down. Luckily for the bank, the reserve requirement was recently reduced to zero (Federal Reserve).

Not so lucky were the residential victims, who not only lost their homes but also had fire insurance canceled during the preceding months (Business Insider). State Farm, for instance, ceased to accept new homeowners’ insurance applications, in California, beginning in 2023. Additionally, they canceled 72,000 existing California policies last year, citing natural catastrophe risks as the rationale. Clearly, insurers saw this disaster coming and took action. Now, many have no choice but to ask whether the local government saw it coming, too. Or, if they somehow didn’t, how on earth they managed not to.

Now, the spread of the fires has slowed, largely due to the abatement of the wind. More than 7,500 firefighters were actively battling the blazes as of a few days ago (Gov.ca). Despite the boots on the ground, various issues embattled these public servants throughout this tragedy. Firstly, hydrants were not providing enough water in the Palisades neighborhoods. City officials blame the “unpredictable severity” of the fires, and some defend the lackluster level of preparedness by drawing similarities between Palisades water availability and that of typical localities around the US (LA Times). This is pure foolishness–there is no excusing the harebrained actions (and inaction) that led up to these fires. Not to mention, LA is a known fire-prone area, and has more concentrated wealth to be lost in a blaze than most of the country. Many have parroted the line, “Don’t politicize this!” Unsurprisingly, many of those people support the politicians that are to blame here. Those same individuals telling all not to politicize this travesty, are themselves making it into a political issue by persistently defending leaders who they politically align with.

“How can he say this with certainty,” you may wonder. Well, if politics were not a part of the picture, no one would deem it wise to defend the institutions whose clear mismanagement and lack of acute preparation led directly to this event. Certainly, the winds were bad, and it was dry–the perfect setup for a disastrous fire. Those are indeed relevant facts. Yet, as many seem not to understand, those facts do not negate the reality of inexcusable mismanagement. Again, those who claim they don’t want to politicize the situation, indeed politicize it, by doggedly defending the governor, mayor, and fire department leaders, who are directly responsible for many of the causal factors here.

Indeed, the “anti-politicization” folks are hypocrites in the end. As they try to absolve their politicians of blame and parrot that this shouldn’t be politicized, they simultaneously blame climate change for the fires. On the face of it, that blaming does not seem to be politicization. Yet, nearly no one ever references climate change as a sheer natural occurrence that we are victims of. Rather, it is almost always referenced to place blame on politicians, conservative environmental policy, and even citizens, for causing the issue. And, in turn, it is used as a tool to push for more green legislation. Thus, bringing such an issue into the picture is inarguably politicization.

I’ve repeatedly mentioned who is truly to blame for these fires–and it’s not the climate or diesel truck owners. So why, exactly, should the local politicians and fire department leaders be held accountable? Let’s dive into that. Firstly, there were massive budget cuts to the local fire department, to the tune of $17.6 million, undertaken by mayor Karen Bass. This reduced the opportunity for training, as well as the total equipment and capacity for staffing available to the fire team. While the reduction was only around 2% of the total department budget, the cut included a $7 million reduction in overtime allowance. The fire chief herself, Crowley, stated in July last year that the cuts “severely limited the department’s capacity to prepare for, train for, and respond to large-scale emergencies” (CBS). The cut in overtime hours also limited the Department’s ability to conduct brush clearance and residential inspections.

Disastrously, recent months turned out to be one of the worst possible times to conduct fewer inspections, due to record dryness, absent humidity, and strong winds. Fire Chief Crowley and Mayor Bass each point the finger anywhere but at themselves, trying to reduce their personal accountability to the public. Chief Crowley, on one hand, purportedly informed the Mayor that the budget cuts would severely hamper the department’s ability to fight wildfires. Bass blames the “unprecedented wind storm,” of a ferocity they haven’t seen “in years.” Well, Mayor Bass, is it unprecedented or has it simply not occurred to this extent in a few years?

To find out, I searched the National Weather Service’s severe weather records for the area. There is data here that goes back to the 1800s–I think we need not go quite so far. So, I looked at the strong wind events recorded over the past ten years, since 2014. If there was a notable absence of strong wind conditions that could spur on a wildfire, I would be willing to admit that I’m wrong in ascribing blame to politicians and department leaders.

Yet, I wasn’t wrong–severe wind events are anything but rare in the county. In 2014, gusts at Cuyamaca peak, down the coast, reached as high as 100 mph. In early 2017, a gust of 107 mph was reported in the San Bernardino Mountains. In 2019, another gust reaching 98 mph was clocked at Burns Canyon. In 2020, a peak gust of 106 mph was recorded; come 2021, gusts of 80-90 mph; then in 2023, 112 mph (Weather.gov). You get the point here. These wind events are not as abnormal as the responsible leaders would like you to believe. Every year I checked, many more strong wind events were recorded, nearly always pushing above 50 mph.

In the end, the budget cuts were entirely unwarranted–this fire is not some entirely unpredictable freak accident. It was entirely predictable–State Farm, Allstate, Nationwide, Chubb, and many other insurance providers all predicted this (FOX Business). Why couldn’t the LA city leadership do the same? At best, this is negligence; at worst, intentional dereliction of duty.

In addition to budget cuts, there were various other instances of mismanagement. Low water supply, for example. When the fires broke out, firefighters experienced low water pressure and even nonfunctional fire hydrants. Los Angeles Department of Water and Power CEO Quinones said that the fire crews were using water “faster than it could be replenished” (NBC Montana). This is a major system failure–forget the fact that multiple fires were raging in different areas. Each community has a devoted water system, and each system proved inadequate, for both the Palisades and Eaton fires.

Multiple layers of foolishness contributed to the water supply issue. An LAFD senior official stated that the lack of water was a common problem, and the fire hydrants had long needed fixing. Yet Quinones did not do her due diligence. Her previous employer, PG&E, for which she was an executive, went bankrupt for liability in California wildfires–facing a total of $30 billion in claims (Forbes). Go figure… How she was hired as the DWP CEO is beyond me.

Water supply is an issue that could have easily been fixed. The Santa Ynez Reservoir, a 117-million-gallon basin in the Palisades area, has been empty since February 2024, due to “repairs to its cover” (LA Times). No excuse justifies having such a major portion of the emergency water supply offline for eleven months for a reason like that, especially amidst such a wildfire-prone season. A DWP spokesperson claimed that “the system was never designed for a wildfire scenario that we are experiencing.” That makes perfect sense. After all, no reason to be doubly safe with multiple contingencies when the second most populated city in the US sits in the bullseye of a wildfire-prone area. I apologize for the sarcasm–it’s a ridiculous situation on various levels.

Yet another disappointing failure by California’s water department involves the prioritization of environmentalism above all. The Sacramento River Basin outputs 5.5 trillion gallons of freshwater to the ocean per year. As a result, the delta where the river meets the ocean is an optimal location for collecting water. Pumps there are powerful enough to reverse the water’s flow. Yet, they are severely throttled down by environmentalist restrictions (Sacramento Bee). See, there is a small fish that resides there–the delta smelt. And, due to the fish being classified as endangered, water pumps are restricted so as not to cause the small fish harm. This results in less water provision to consumers, creating more strain on other sources, such that the margin of extra water available for unexpected events is far too slim.

That is not the only example of environmentalism causing real danger to people in California (whose safety should be placed before that of any animal, in my humble opinion). Brush clearance is also unnecessarily complex to do. The California Environmental Quality Act often requires detailed environmental assessments be done, and permits acquired before any land alteration can be done. Local agencies and private owners have faced difficulty in this process, even for actions as simple as brush clearance, much less a controlled burn or forest thinning. Why is it made so difficult?

In many cases, to protect an owl. Where spotted owls or other endangered species are deemed present, the mentioned activities can be delayed or blocked indefinitely. It is illegal to “take” any species that is classified as endangered (Cornell). That word is used as a catch-all, including actions such as hunting, capturing, harassing, and harming. Brush clearance is considered habitat destruction–a form of harm. Thus, permits are required.

On top of the already numerous levels of inanity at play here, is the matter of DEI policies within the LA Fire Department. Forgive me for saying this, but I would prefer to have the fittest possible individuals to protect me, were I ever in danger from a fire. It wouldn’t necessarily be easy to prove a causal influence of DEI upon the lackluster initial response to the fire, but I’d like to provide you with some simple information, to do with as you like.

First of all, a recent advertisement for the LAFD showcased female firefighters who made a few ridiculous claims. First of all, they said that fire victims are concerned with seeing firefighters that look like them–that this factor makes them more at ease. I’m not convinced that anyone truly has a sliver of care about that when they are in immediate danger. Secondly, one particularly senseless firefighter responded to a concern that women are likely to be less able to carry grown men to safety if the circumstances required. This individual responded by saying, “he got himself in the wrong place if I have to carry him out of a fire” (Newsweek).

In 2016, then-Fire Chief Terrazas sent a lengthy memo to the Board of Fire Commissioners regarding gender equity in the workforce. His claims insinuated that it was wrong to have a Department whose demographics did not mirror those of their constituency. Following the claims was an action plan, which aimed to “attract qualified prospects with a higher than usual proportion of women” (Memo). The same chord was struck regarding ethnic and gender minority representation. Overall, it is safe to say the true priorities of the LAFD are clear, regardless of what they might say now that a disaster has occurred on their watch. Inarguably, an organization committed to some form of public safety should be only concerned with what will enable them to keep the public safe. Making things such as equity and inclusion primary is certain to hamper actual firefighting ability. We face similar issues in the military and police forces. Certain career paths are designed for those who are most physically fit. When it comes to gross strength levels, men in general are better suited for such positions. This is not sexist; it is basic truth. Absolutely, many women are a good fit for such jobs–but one should never make demographic equality central in this realm.

California had been lucky until today. They have had free rein, majorly, to pursue environmental progress while neglecting things that truly matter, like disaster preparation. Residents of the idyllic area were free to judge the rest of the world for not being green enough, or progressive enough, compared to them. There is indeed room for various perspectives in this country. Be green, be progressive, as you like. But, when those things begin to define who you are, to the point that nothing else matters in light of them, be careful.

One cannot simply embrace diversity or environmentalism above all and expect to achieve the same performance they otherwise might. Likewise, one cannot put the protection of endangered species over that of human lives. Until now, California leaders could keep the wool over their eyes, pretending that their mismanagement wouldn’t have consequences. In the end, most of us are not surprised–there were consequences. Do better, going forward. Be realistic, and pragmatic, instead of purely political.

As to the current state of the fires, this Monday, January 13, 2025, their end remains largely unknown. So far, 24 have been confirmed dead as a result of the blazes, with many more individuals unaccounted for as of yet. The Palisades fire, directly west of downtown LA, has burned 24,000 acres, while the Eaton fire, to the northeast, has burned 14,000. Various other, smaller fires have cropped up and been dealt with, each having burned anywhere between a few dozen to more than a thousand acres.

Each major fire has been partially contained–the second-largest fire stands at 33% containment, while the largest remains only 14% contained. Strong winds over the next week threaten to exacerbate this issue, driving fires beyond their current borders. Already, there are plentiful firefighters in the area, but a return of winds akin to those early last week could easily nullify much of their efforts. All we can do is pray that those winds do not return, and that if they do, they push fires away from residential areas–if winds were to blow strongly east or south, this threat will magnify exponentially. An uncontrolled fire could, in theory, move straight through the entire city. I hope this situation gets brought under control, and that, going forward, things are done differently so that this never occurs again.

‍

‍

Works Cited

Bitter, Alex. “Insurers Cut California Fire Coverage Months before LA, Palisades Blaze.” Business Insider, 8 Jan. 2025, www.businessinsider.com/california-fire-insurance-coverage-cancellation-no-payout-2025-1. Accessed 13 Jan. 2025.

Cornell Law School Legal Information Institute. “50 CFR § 17.22 - Permits for Endangered Species.” LII / Legal Information Institute, 2016, www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/50/17.22. Accessed 13 Jan. 2025.

Dumas, Breck. “California Insurance Crisis: List of Carriers That Have Fled or Reduced Coverage in the State.” Fox Business, 10 Jan. 2025, www.foxbusiness.com/lifestyle/california-insurance-crisis-here-carriers-have-fled-reduced-coverage-state.

Federal Reserve. “Federal Reserve Board - Reserve Requirements.” Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, 22 Jan. 2024, www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/reservereq.htm.

Frolo, Caitlyn. “LA Water Chief Knew about Empty Reservoir, Broken Hydrants Months before Fires: Report.” NBC Montana, 2025, nbcmontana.com/news/nation-world/los-angeles-water-chief-knew-about-empty-reservoir-broken-hydrants-months-before-fires-mayor-karen-bass-department-water-power-janisse-quinones-reservoir-pacific-palisades-report. Accessed 13 Jan. 2025.

Hamilton, Matt. “Newsom Orders Probe into Why Pacific Palisades Reservoir Was Offline during Fires.” Los Angeles Times, 10 Jan. 2025, www.latimes.com/california/story/2025-01-10/as-flames-raged-in-palisades-a-key-reservoir-nearby-was-offline. Accessed 13 Jan. 2025.

Helman, Christopher. “As $30B in Wildfire Claims Bankrupt PG&E, California Wonders Who Will Pay after the next Conflagration.” Forbes, 21 Jan. 2019, www.forbes.com/sites/christopherhelman/2019/01/21/as-30b-in-wildfire-claims-bankrupt-pge-california-wonders-who-will-pay-after-the-next-conflagration/.

Ingram, Julia. “A Month before Fires, L.A. Fire Chief Warned Budget Cuts Were Hampering Emergency Response.” Cbsnews.com, CBS News, 9 Jan. 2025, www.cbsnews.com/news/california-wildfires-los-angeles-fire-chief-budget-cuts/.

Marshall, Kendrick. “Nearly 60% of California Is “Abnormally Dry” to Start 2025. Where Are Drought Impacts Worst?” Sacramento Bee, 5 Jan. 2025, www.sacbee.com/news/local/article297951838.html.

“More than 7,500 Firefighting, Emergency Personnel Deployed to Fight Unprecedented Los Angeles Fires | Governor of California.” Governor of California, 9 Jan. 2025, www.gov.ca.gov/2025/01/08/more-than-7500-firefighting-emergency-personnel-deployed-to-fight-unprecedented-los-angeles-fires/. Accessed 13 Jan. 2025.

National Weather Service. A History of Significant Weather Events in Southern California. 1 Mar. 2024.

Sager, Monica. “LAFD Deputy Chief Faces Backlash for Past Remarks on Fire Victims.” Newsweek, 10 Jan. 2025, www.newsweek.com/lafd-deputy-chief-faces-backlash-past-remarks-fire-victims-2013351. Accessed 13 Jan. 2025.

Terrazas, Ralph. “LAFD Gender Equity Action Report.” Los Angeles Fire Department, 6 Aug. 2016.

‍