The Los Angeles Fire Department’s response to the Palisades Fire has come under scrutiny following Mayor Karen Bass’s decision to remove Chief Kristin Crowley from her position. Mayor Bass highlighted the failure to pre-deploy firefighters before the firestorm erupted on January 7, stating that 1,000 firefighters who could have been on duty were instead sent home under Chief Crowley’s leadership.
A recent investigation by The Los Angeles Times has revealed significant concerns about the preparedness of the Los Angeles Fire Department for the Palisades Fire, despite warnings of hurricane-strength winds and dry conditions. Key findings from the investigation include:
Failure to Pre-Deploy Resources
Top commanders in the Los Angeles Fire Department made the decision not to assign approximately 1,000 available firefighters and numerous water-carrying engines for emergency deployment before the fire in Pacific Palisades. This lack of pre-deployment was a critical oversight that may have impacted the department’s ability to contain the fire.
Missed Opportunities for Early Detection
Former officials from the department have pointed out missed opportunities to send additional engines to Pacific Palisades before the fire broke out. These additional engines could have patrolled the hillsides and canyons, potentially spotting the fire in its early stages when it was more manageable.
Comparison to Previous Responses
In 2011, during similarly dire fire conditions, the LAFD took proactive measures by positioning at least 40 extra fire engines at stations in high-risk areas, including the Palisades. This strategic deployment of resources, including pre-deployed and ready reserve engines, was a stark contrast to the decisions made during the Palisades Fire in 2025.
Looking Ahead
In response to the concerns raised by the investigation, the Board of Fire Commissioners has announced plans for an independent audit of the Palisades fire response. This audit aims to identify areas for improvement and ensure that the LAFD is better equipped to handle future emergencies effectively.
As the community reflects on the aftermath of the Palisades Fire, questions remain about the decision-making processes and resource allocation within the Los Angeles Fire Department. The accountability of leadership and the need for enhanced preparedness measures are at the forefront of discussions surrounding this incident.
In conclusion, the investigation into the LAFD’s response to the Palisades Fire sheds light on critical gaps in planning and execution that may have impacted the outcome of the fire. By learning from these findings and implementing necessary changes, the department can work towards building a more resilient and effective response system for future emergencies.
